US Military Ready to Target Enemy Drones on U.S. Soil if Bipartisan Legislation Passes

Dozens of drones that flew over Langley Air Force Base in late 2023 have exposed a significant vulnerability: military officials did not believe they had the legal authority to shoot down unauthorized unmanned aerial vehicles over United States soil. This incident, which lasted for over two weeks in December, saw a swarm of drones entering restricted airspace above Langley—a facility that houses critical national security assets, including F-22 Raptor stealth fighters. The absence of a clear protocol left security personnel with no choice but to allow the approximately 20-foot-long drones to hover near sensitive and classified zones.

In response to these concerning incursions, a new bipartisan bill—the COUNTER Act—is now being considered in Congress. The legislation aims to provide more military bases the ability to become “covered facilities,” giving them explicit authority to engage with and, if necessary, neutralize drones that violate their airspace.

Currently, under existing law, only about half of the 360 domestic U.S. bases are classified as “covered facilities” authorized to counter drone threats. The COUNTER Act seeks to broaden this classification, allowing any military facility with a well-defined perimeter to apply for the same authority. This expansion is seen as critical by lawmakers and defense officials who have voiced concern over gaps in current security protocols.

The bill enjoys broad bipartisan and bicameral support, increasing its chances of passage. It is spearheaded by Senators Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), both members of the Armed Services Committee, with companion legislation introduced in the House by Representatives August Pfluger (R-Texas) and Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.).

A key provision in the legislation would direct the Secretary of Defense to delegate counter-drone authority down to combatant commanders. This change aims to streamline decision-making during emergencies, eliminating delays caused by lengthy approval chains.

Sen. Cotton addressed the urgency of the measure, stating, “Leaving American military facilities vulnerable to drone incursions puts our service members, the general public, and our national security at risk.”

Despite inquiries, the Pentagon has provided little detail regarding the Langley incidents, except to confirm their occurrence. Whether officials have identified the source or purpose of these drones remains unclear.

Sen. Gillibrand commented on the growing risk, saying, “As commercial drones become more commonplace, we must ensure that they are not being used to share sensitive information with our adversaries, to conduct attacks against our service members, or otherwise pose a threat to our national security.”

Confusion following such drone sightings has often been compounded by unclear protocols. In the aftermath of the Langley incursions, military officials reportedly referred lawmakers to various agencies—including the FBI, Northern Command, and local law enforcement—highlighting bureaucratic fragmentation.

General Gregory Guillot, chief of U.S. Northern Command (NORCOM) and North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February that there were over 350 unauthorized drone detections at military facilities during the previous year. These detections occurred at 100 different installations, raising concerns about surveillance and the potential exposure of sensitive U.S. military capabilities.

Guillot pointed out that current regulations hamper effective counter-UAV measures, creating vulnerabilities that may be exploited by both known and unknown actors. He advocated for the expansion of Section 130i of Title 10, which governs the protection of certain military facilities and assets from unmanned aircraft threats.

“I would propose and advocate for expansion of 130i [authorities] to include all military installations, not just covered installations,” Guillot told lawmakers. He further recommended extending the jurisdiction slightly beyond military perimeters, noting, “They could surveil the base from outside the perimeter. And under the current authorities, we can’t address that.”

The surge in mysterious drone activity, including incidents over New Jersey in late 2023 and early 2024, has drawn further attention to this growing security concern. With bipartisan momentum behind the COUNTER Act, lawmakers hope to close these critical gaps before they are exploited any further.