[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 97 (Wednesday, June 17, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4251-S4252]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Heller):
  S. 1595. A bill to describe the authority under which Federal 
entities may use mobile aerial-view devices to surveil, protect 
individual and collective privacy against warrantless governmental 
intrusion through the use of mobile aerial-view devices, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to 
further protect American's privacy, while providing clear guidance for 
Federal law enforcement for information collection using the newest 
technologies. I

[[Page S4252]]

am sure my colleagues recall recent reports, from just a few weeks ago, 
detailing the FBI's use of secret planes to spy on people in dozens of 
cities without a warrant. These reports troubled both my colleagues and 
me, and left unclear exactly when the government thinks it is okay to 
surveil people from the air. As I have stressed many times before, the 
American public deserves to know the laws that the government relies on 
to surveil people, and the limits of those laws. And that's what this 
bill sets out to do.
  Now, drafting legislation in an area where technology is advancing 
rapidly and so many policy issues intersect, is a very difficult task. 
But I am confident that the Protecting Individuals From Mass Aerial 
Surveillance Act of 2015 reflects feedback from several stakeholders, 
experts and civil liberties groups, and provides the government the 
tools it needs to keep us safe without sacrificing our civil liberties.
  This bill would generally prohibit federal aerial surveillance 
without a warrant, but with several exceptions. It would allow the 
government to aerially surveil to protect people from disasters, 
terrorist attacks, entry of illegal substances at national borders, and 
other emergency situations. In addition, it would allow for government 
agencies to survey wildlife and conduct research by use of aerial 
vehicles, in order to ensure that habitats are preserved and 
environmental risks are assessed properly.
  This bill also would prohibit the government from identifying people 
that happen to appear in aerial surveillance, unless it has probable 
cause to believe those people have committed specific crimes. All 
information gathered in violation of the bill would be barred admission 
as evidence in any court of law, and the bill would also prohibit 
private operators of aerial vehicles from being proxies for unlawful 
government surveillance.
  I want to stress that we cannot stand to wait much longer to pass 
sensible limits on a type of surveillance whose technical capabilities 
are advancing rapidly. With the proliferation of drones in US airspace, 
and the numbers expected to increase by the thousands in the following 
few years, there is a real concern that the law has not been keeping up 
with technical advancements. And drones are not the only concern--use 
of planes and helicopters equipped with modern surveillance equipment 
make the technological landscape an incredibly dynamic one. That's why 
this bill today would remain technology neutral and apply to both 
manned and unmanned aerial vehicles.
  To my fellow colleagues, I strongly believe that this bill strikes 
the proper balance between allowing for aerial surveillance and 
protecting individual privacy. I am glad to have received help and 
feedback from the Center for Democracy and Technology, SOAR Oregon--a 
leading voice in Oregon's UAV industry, the Small UAV Coalition, the 
Electronic Frontier Foundation, the ACLU, and other experts. I hope my 
colleagues will join me in supporting this bill and offering their 
feedback. At this time, I would like to ask that this statement be 
entered into the Record.
                                 ______