The Trump administration has restricted law enforcement’s First Amendment right to record by issuing an unprecedented nationwide flight ban barring private drone operators, including professional and citizen journalists, from flying drones within half a mile of any ICE or CBP vehicle.
In January, the EFF and media organizations included the new York Times And Washington Post Responding to this blatant violation of the First Amendment, demands were made that the FAA lift this flight ban. More than two months later, we are still waiting for the FAA to respond to our letter.
The First Amendment guarantees law enforcement the right to record. As we have seen with the extrajudicial killings of George Floyd, Renee Good, and Alex Pretty, capturing law enforcement on camera can increase accountability and raise awareness of police misconduct.
21 month long “temporary” flight ban?
The FAA regularly issues Temporary Flight Restrictions (TFRs) to prevent people from flying in specified airspace. TFRs are usually issued during natural disasters, or to protect major sporting events and government officials such as the President, and in most cases are issued for only a few hours.
This is not the case with sanction number FDC 6/4375, which began on January 16, 2026. This TFR lasts for 21 months – through October 29, 2027 – and includes entire nation. It prohibits any person from flying any unmanned aircraft (i.e., a drone) within 3000 feet measured horizontally of any “facilities and mobile assets”, including “ground vehicle convoys and their associated escorts” of the Departments of Defense, Energy, Justice, and Homeland Security. Violators may be subject to criminal and civil penalties, and may risk having their drones confiscated or destroyed.
In practical terms, this TFR means that anyone flying their drone within half a mile of an ICE or CBP agent’s car (a DHS “mobile property”) can face criminal charges and have their drone shot down. The practical unreasonableness of this TFR is underlined by the fact that immigration agents often use unmarked rental cars, cars with no license plates, or alter the license plates of their own cars to perform their functions. Nor do they give advance warning of those actions.
TFR is an unconstitutional violation of freedom of expression
While the FAA claims the TFR is based on its legal authority, the flight ban violates not only several constitutional rights, but also the agency’s own regulations.
First Amendment violation. As we point out in the letter, nearly every federal appeals court has recognized the First Amendment right of Americans to record law enforcement officers performing their official duties. By subjecting drone operators to criminal and civil penalties as well as the potential destruction or confiscation of their drones, the TFR penalizes the lawful recording of law enforcement officials, including immigration agents, without the necessary justification.
Fifth Amendment violation. The Fifth Amendment guarantees the right to due process, which includes being given reasonable notice before being deprived of liberty or property by the government. Under flight restrictions, advance notice is also not possible. As discussed above, drone operators cannot know if they are within 3000 horizontal feet of unmarked DHS vehicles. Yet the TFR allows the government to capture or even shoot down drones flying within the TFR’s scope, and to impose criminal and civil penalties on the operator.
Violation of FAA regulations. In issuing a TFR, the FAA’s own rules require the agency to “specify”[] The danger or situation requires restrictions. Additionally, the FAA must provide a point of contact to accredited news representatives to obtain permission to fly drones within the restricted area. The FAA did not address any of these requirements in issuing a nationwide ban on drones in close proximity to government vehicles.
EFF calls for repeal of TFR
We do not believe it is any coincidence that TFR was enacted in January 2026, at the height of anti-ICE protests in Minneapolis, shortly after the murder of Renee Good and shortly before the shooting of Alex Pretty. After both of those tragedies, civilian recordings played an important role in refuting the government’s false account of the events.
By penalizing citizens for recording federal law enforcement officers, TFR helps shield ICE and other immigration agents from investigation and accountability. It also discourages the exercise of a key First Amendment right. The EFF has long advocated for the right to record police, and exercising that right today is more important than ever.
Finally, while recording law enforcement is protected by the First Amendment, be aware that officers may retaliate against you for exercising this right. Please see our guidance on securely recording law enforcement activities.
<a href