![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/02\/xlarge.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Last week, the Military Times ran a report based on statements from James Williams, the man from the\u00a0Federal Aviation Administration that is “in charge of integrating unmanned aircraft into US airspace.” The story had an encouraging headline: “No Armed Drones in US Airspace<\/a>.”<\/p>\n Over the next 10 years, unmanned aircraft could fill a number of commercial and government uses here at home \u2013 but those uses don\u2019t include putting ordnance on target, said James Williams of the Federal Aviation Administration.<\/p>\n \u201cWe currently have rules in the books already that deal with releasing anything from an aircraft, period,\u201d Williams said Wednesday. \u201cThose rules are in place and are there that would prohibit weapons from being installed on a civil aircraft. We don\u2019t have any plans on changing them for unmanned aircraft.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n An all out prohibition on armed drones over US airspace would indicate a significant check on the government’s growing powers expanding into uncharted territory thanks to the technological advances of unmanned aerial vehicles. Drones have made it easier for Washington to conduct covert warfare and surveillance in other countries, and those that are critical of their use have for years warned of their inevitable domestic application.<\/p>\n While Williams’s comment seems categorical – no armed drones over US airspace – his meaning is less clear. He mentions laws that prohibit weapons being installed on “civil aircraft.” What about the government? Certain US senators, including Sen. Rand Paul<\/a> (R-KY) have made it a mission of theirs to get clarity on “whether or not the president can kill American citizens through the drone strike program on US soil,” given Obama’s declared authority<\/a> to do so on foreign soil.<\/p>\n Steven Aftergood of Secrecy News gives further specificity to the question<\/a>, citing a US Army manual. The army’s use of drones over US airspace is “constrained, not prohibited,” he reports.<\/p>\n There are significant barriers to the Army\u2019s use of unmanned aerial systems within the United States, according to a new Army manual, but they are not prohibitive or categorical.<\/p>\n \u201cLegal restrictions on the use of unmanned aircraft systems in domestic operations are numerous,\u201d\u00a0the manual<\/a>\u00a0states.\u00a0 The question arises particularly in the context of Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA), refering to military assistance to government agencies in disaster response and other domestic emergencies.<\/p>\n \u201cUse of DOD intelligence capabilities for DSCA missions\u2013such as incident awareness and assessment, damage assessment, and search and rescue\u2013requires prior Secretary of Defense approval, together with approval of both the mission and use of the exact DOD intelligence community capabilities. Certain missions require not only approval of the Secretary of Defense, but also coordination, certification, and possibly, prior approval by the Attorney General of the United States.\u201d<\/p>\n As a general rule, \u201cmilitary forces cannot use military systems for surveillance and pursuit of individuals.\u201d\u00a0 This is precluded by the\u00a0Posse Comitatus Act<\/a>, as reflected in DoD\u00a0Directive 5525.5<\/a>.<\/p>\n But there is a possibility that exceptions may arise,\u00a0the manual<\/a>\u00a0indicates.\u00a0 \u201c[Unmanned aircraft] operators cannot conduct surveillance on specifically identified U.S. persons, unless expressly approved by the Secretary of Defense, consistent with U.S. laws and regulations.\u201d\u00a0 See U.S. Army Field Manual FM 3-52,\u00a0Airspace Control<\/a>, February 2013 (especially Appendix G).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n So there are regulatory and procedural constraints on the government’s use of domestic drones in general, and the US Army manual prohibits the use of military systems for surveillance and “pursuit of individuals.” That would suggest pursuing individuals with drones – armed or unarmed – is not allowed. Furthermore, the Posse Comitatus Act restrains in principle the military’s domestic capabilities. So again, in principle, it would seem illegal.<\/p>\n But nothing here yet specifies what are the rules for the police force’s use of drones, to which Army manuals and Posse Comitatus do not apply.<\/p>\n Furthermore, many legal experts<\/a> agree the President’s use of drones<\/a> in targeted killings abroad is illegal<\/a>. But that hasn’t prevented their expansive application. Indeed, to avoid legal scrutiny, the Executive Branch simply keeps the program technically secret<\/a>\u00a0and conducted by the CIA. Covert activities are those that would be illegal…if the government would make them public and submit to judicial review, which it refuses to do<\/a>.<\/p>\n When it comes down to it, the question of whether armed drones will be used to pursue domestic targets depends on how robust the rule of law is – as opposed to rule by men. To what extent does the state submit itself<\/a> to its own rules, laws, and promises? Not very much, especially in cases of “national security<\/a>.”<\/p>\n