The FAA’s drone registry is unlawful. So says the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Way back when the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act was passed, the legislation stated “that the FAA ‘may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft.’”
Circuit Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote, “Statutory interpretation does not get much simpler. The Registration Rule is unlawful as applied to model aircraft.”
Shame on you FAA for promulgating a rule. Don’t let it happen again… unless Congress gives you that power.
I’ll be honest. This make me think of Schoolhouse Rock.
And yet, the FAA is “carefully reviewing” the decision, according to officials.
“The FAA put registration and operational regulations in place to ensure that drones are operated in a way that is safe and does not pose security and privacy threats,” read an FAA statement.
It must be nice for FAA personnel to be able to repeatedly conjure up safety, security and privacy as justification for doing anything — even if what they are doing doesn’t make sense.
After all, if registration is the answer, then why do some people drive in an unsafe way? Why do boaters operate unsafely from time to time? Why are camera manufacturers allowed to sell telephoto lenses that can read a newspaper article from a quarter mile away? Why do we have public roads next to power stations?
Simply put… registration isn’t the answer. At least not to the question the FAA says it wants to answer. Never has been. Never will be.
Since no FAA official will pay a fine or serve time or even be demoted or re-assigned, I wonder what the consequences are for those who promulgated an unlawful rule.
Who’ll get their knuckles rapped?
Having been a commercial pilot for nearly fifty years and flying RC for over thirty years I responded to the FAA notice of proposed rule making on this issue. “If I ran the zoo there’d be some changes made.” I don’t feel any safer when in the air because of the requirement for registration.
This was just another over reach of the last administration. I wonder how many of these do gooders actually fly anything but a desk???
All real or potential bank robbers should have to register and properly label their brown paper bags (if they are to leave them). Auto registration works for parking tickets and toll violations, but for the real fines they have to physically catch you.
Consumer drone suppliers may have enough volume and money to keep FAA at bay. Was not true for Ultralight Suppliers.
Ben … the “I’m Just a Bill” video on the long and circuitous path a Bill must take before becoming a law could just as easily apply to third class medical relief — Basic Med — that took so long to become law.
All of us who have benefited from the ongoing tireless efforts of Sen. Inhofe, Rep. Rokita, et al, owe them kudos for their efforts. The cartoon exemplifies why the new FAR 68 wasn’t exactly what we wanted but was better than what previously existed or the AOPA/EAA request for waiver asked for.
In THIS case, however, it’s the opposite. The 2012 “law” was specific and the FAA — with it’s ‘infinite wisdom’ and all powerful ability to regulate the masses — over stepped its mandate and the judge agreed. I’m with you … shame on them.
They are SO fixated on the ‘safety’ thing that common sense often evades them. There are far too many lawyers involved in their processes. I have personally done “battle” with some of their ASO’s … and won, thankfully. At the higher levels, however, they seem to be able to do whatever they want … and THAT has to be both stopped AND the mythical “they” need to be punished when they go too far. If they can hold ME(us) accountable … “we” should be able to hold them accountable, too, as you say.
They take the “safety” thing way, way too far. At some point, personal accountability and responsibility needs to enter the process, as well. I think of it as pointing a herd of cows. Mostly, they all comply but once in a while, one strays and has to be reeled back in. It’s good that the judge reminded them that they word for all of us.
Not unusual for a government agency to violate the law and/or the constitution.
The FAA should at least be held accountable for collecting the illegal $5.00 fees charged to each operator.
If registration is now considered illegal by the courts, then the courts should consider the original collection of the operator fees an illegal charge.
The courts need to force the FAA to refund the licensing fees to all who paid.
Moving under the D.C. Court of appeals decision, any and all who unwittingly stood in line to register their private property under the colorful reach of the Federal Aviation Administration should move for a full and complete refund.
Secondly, the applicant should move for the redaction from the Agency’s system of records an improperly established record of the individual applicant.
I have mixed feelings on this. On the one hand, I don’t think it’s a good idea to hinder the drone industry like the manned aircraft industry (just because we have to suffer doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to make all of us suffer), but on the other hand, I understand the accountability aspect. If we have an unsafe operator near the airport I’m based at and someone hits the stupid thing, how do we find the responsible person and punish them? (Because frankly, a manned aircraft should have higher standing on account of real live people sitting inside it) I’m not saying registration is the answer, but perhaps a manufacturer’s registry would make sense. No cost to the drone owner, no federal government involved unless there is an incident that gets traced back to a specific drone. If the manufacturer goes belly-up, the FAA gets the registry data then but it otherwise stays privately managed.
You have a point there. I don’t fly drones and do not live in the U.S.A. I am fascinated by the pleasure and utility of flying drones. But as the world stands today, my biggest concern would be the threat of some “nasty extremist” buying a bunch of drones capable of bigger payloads, and being not traceable, decides to use a “swarm of these” remotely, to deliver some horror to innocent people in a crowded area. The frequency with which these desperate deranged pigs are modifying their mode of delivery is scary. Even with its limitations, capacity for identifying the owner of larger drones would be desirable. The technology available to program and fly them remotely to destinations could be the driving force for one of these pigs to try. Worth remembering that there his no preparation to take them down even if they are picked up by some observer.
Ben, your usually insightful comments took a turn into the weeds with “why do some people drive in an unsafe way…” etc. DUH! The real question is “why don’t MORE people drive in an unsafe way…?” And the answer is, at least in part “accountability”. Imperfect as it is, registration imposes the potential for accountability on those who endanger others with their ‘recreational’ drones. IMHO, the Appeals Court made the correct decision since how much clearer could the 336 language be? Now it’s up to Congress to fix the problem. And problem it is. ‘Recreational’ drones regularly shut down wildfire suppression aviation, interfere with medevac ops, intrude on the privacy of neighbors, and commit other unaccepable actions that beg for a accountability. In this case the FAA took action, which unfortunately, Congress explicitly prohibited. Case open, then conclusively closed.
I am glad to see this ridiculous registration requirement is finally behind the hobby RC industry.