State Finance and Procurement - Retention Proceeds
HB0954 would create new limits on how Maryland state agencies and local governments may use unmanned aircraft, or drones. The bill generally prohibits a unit of State government or a political subdivision from deploying or operating a drone for surveillance, evidence collection, or any other purpose, and also bars those entities from using information obtained through drone use by any public or private entity.
The bill also adds a new evidentiary rule making any evidence obtained through drone use in violation of the new law inadmissible in criminal, civil, or administrative proceedings. In effect, it establishes both an operational restriction on government drone use and a suppression remedy for evidence gathered unlawfully under the bill.
HB0954 would amend the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article and the Public Safety Article by adding a new subtitle governing state and local government use of unmanned aircraft. It would restrict government drone deployment except in specified circumstances, including pursuant to a valid search warrant, to execute an arrest warrant, in fresh pursuit, during active search and rescue operations, to locate an escaped prisoner, to prevent imminent serious bodily harm, or under a federal homeland security terrorism determination. It would also make evidence obtained in violation of these restrictions inadmissible in proceedings, affecting law enforcement, prosecutors, courts, and local governments.
The bill appears to reflect a privacy- and civil-liberties-oriented approach to drone regulation, with its text emphasizing broad prohibitions and narrow exceptions. Because no committee transcript or vote record is provided, there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the supplied materials. Based on the bill language alone, the measure seems designed to limit government surveillance while preserving emergency and public safety uses.
The main points of contention are likely to be the breadth of the ban on government drone use and the scope of the exceptions. Supporters would likely favor the privacy protections and limits on warrantless surveillance, while law enforcement and public safety agencies may object that the bill could hinder routine investigations, evidence gathering, and operational flexibility. The exception for use of information acquired through drones operated by any entity may also raise questions about how broadly the prohibition reaches and how it would apply to third-party or privately collected aerial data.