PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 25, 2012
Preserving American Privacy Act of 2012 - Prohibits a federal agency from authorizing the domestic use of an unmanned aircraft for law enforcement purposes or for surveillance of a U.S. national or real property owned by that national, including by any state or local government, except pursuant to warrant and in the investigation of a felony.
Amends the federal criminal code to prohibit a federal agency other than a federal law enforcement agency from using in the United States, or authorizing any federal officer or employee to use in the United States, an unmanned aircraft for such purposes, with the same exceptions. Prohibits the use of any information obtained in violation of such prohibition in a criminal proceeding before a federal court.
Subjects the domestic use of an unmanned aircraft to the same limitations and exceptions as apply in the case of any other search. Prohibits evidence obtained by an agency using an unmanned aircraft from being introduced in an administrative hearing.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits a federal agency from authorizing the domestic use of an unmanned aircraft to permit any private person to conduct surveillance on any other private person without the consent of that other person or the owner of any real property on which that other person is present.
People & committees
Rep. Poe, Ted [R-TX-2] · R–TX
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, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.6199 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.6199 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.6199 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.6199 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.