A Minnesota photojournalist is challenging a federal rule that bans drones from flying near Department of Homeland Security (DSH) buildings and vehicles, arguing the restriction makes lawful newsgathering nearly impossible. 

According to a report by the Minnesota Reformer, independent photojournalist Rob Levine, represented by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, filed the lawsuit in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Scope of the FAA Restriction

The Federal Aviation Administration issued a temporary flight restriction on January 16 that prohibits drones from flying within 3,000 feet laterally and 1,000 feet vertically of federal facilities, including DHS, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Energy. 

The rule also applies to “mobile assets” such as unmarked vehicles and convoys, creating uncertainty about where drone operators can safely fly.

“You have no way of knowing in advance before you fire up the drone whether you are within a prohibited distance of, say, an unmarked car that ICE is using for immigration enforcement,” said Grayson Clary, staff attorney at the Reporters Committee, as cited by the Minnesota Reformer.

Media organizations have raised constitutional concerns over the restriction. According to the Minnesota Reformer, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the National Press Photographers Association sent a joint letter to the FAA on January 28, arguing that the rule could violate First and Fifth Amendment protections.

Levine has previously encountered FAA restrictions during major news events. In 2016, he was the only journalist granted an exemption to fly a drone over the Standing Rock protests in North Dakota. The Minnesota Reformer reports that he now hesitates to deploy drones over areas where DHS operations might be present, citing concerns about arrest or equipment destruction.

Mobile Assets and Enforcement Challenges

Unlike fixed no-fly zones, the new restrictions include mobile assets, which are constantly moving and often unmarked. According to the Minnesota Reformer, this adds a layer of uncertainty for anyone using drones to document public activity.

The lawsuit is expected to examine whether the FAA can enforce these restrictions without infringing on press freedom and due process rights. Legal observers say the outcome could have wide implications for aerial journalism across the country.

Conflicts between drone regulations and media access are not new. Temporary flight restrictions have been implemented in past protests and emergency situations, but the inclusion of mobile assets in this rule represents a new challenge. 

According to the Minnesota Reformer, journalists argue that this could limit coverage in fast-moving or sensitive events, affecting how stories are documented from the air.

The case highlights the ongoing tension between national security measures and the rights of journalists. Its resolution could determine how you and other photojournalists are able to use drones to capture news in public spaces.