PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 5, 2015
Protecting Individuals From Mass Aerial Surveillance Act of 2015
This bill prohibits a federal entity from using unmanned aircraft or other mobile aerial-view devices (MAVDs) to: (1) surveil property, persons, or their effects; or (2) gather evidence pertaining to known or suspected criminal conduct, or conduct that violates a law or regulation.
Exceptions allow MAVDs to be used by federal entities to:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
surveil national borders or national waters to prevent or deter illegal entry of persons or illegal substances;
prevent imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm to a specific individual, counter an imminent risk of a terrorist attack by a specific individual or organization, prevent imminent destruction of evidence, or counter an imminent or actual escape of a criminal or terrorist suspect;
monitor or research environmental, geologic, or weather-related damage and events, including forest fires, erosion, floods, wildlife, habitats, or illegal vegetation on public lands; or
acquire information about an individual who consents to the use of an MAVD.
Law enforcement officials or agencies may use an MAVD to surveil specific property, persons, or their effects pursuant to a search and seizure warrant.
The bill: (1) prohibits a federal entity actor from making an intentional effort to identify an individual from, or associate an individual with, the information collected under certain exceptions to the prohibition on the use of MAVDs; and (2) bars disclosure of collected information except to another federal entity or state, tribal, or local government agency that agrees to be bound by the restrictions in this Act. Such identification and disclosure restrictions shall not apply if there is probable cause that the information collected is evidence of specific criminal activity and a warrant is obtained.
Federal entities are prohibited from: (1) soliciting or awarding contracts to surveil by MAVD for a federal entity, unless the federal entity has existing authority for such surveillance; or (2) purchasing information obtained from MAVD surveillance by a nonfederal entity if such information contains personal information, except with the consent of the affected persons.
This Act shall not be construed to preempt any state law regarding the use of MAVDs exclusively within the borders of that state.
People & committees
Rep. DelBene, Suzan K. [D-WA-1] · D–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3962 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3962 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3962 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3962 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.