An Act to amend and reenact §§ 9.1-102 and 19.2-60.1 of the Code of Virginia, relating to use of unmanned aircraft systems by law-enforcement officers; search warrants; model policy.
HB1219 amends Virginia law governing the use of unmanned aircraft systems (drones) by law-enforcement officers and the process for obtaining search warrants related to drone use. The bill updates § 19.2-60.1 to address when and how law-enforcement may use an unmanned aircraft system in investigations, and it requires a model policy to guide agency use. It also amends § 9.1-102, which sets duties for the Department of Criminal Justice Services and the Board, to align training and policy authority with the new drone-related provisions.
The measure is part of Virginia’s broader framework for regulating law-enforcement technology and surveillance tools. By tying drone use to warrant procedures and model policy standards, the bill is intended to create clearer statewide rules for police agencies, limit ad hoc practices, and provide guidance on privacy and operational safeguards. The bill’s text indicates it was enacted as Chapter 270 of the 2026 Acts of Assembly.
The bill changes two sections of the Code of Virginia: § 9.1-102, which governs the powers and duties of the Department of Criminal Justice Services and the Board, and § 19.2-60.1, which addresses law-enforcement use of unmanned aircraft systems and related search warrant requirements. Its practical effect is to standardize how police agencies may deploy drones and to require a model policy framework, affecting law-enforcement agencies, officers, and the courts that review warrant applications and compliance issues.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct record of debate in the supplied materials. Based on the bill’s enactment into law, the overall legislative sentiment appears to have been favorable or at least sufficient to secure passage. The subject matter suggests a policy balance between law-enforcement operational needs and privacy or civil-liberties concerns.
The likely points of contention are the scope of police authority to use drones, whether a warrant should be required in particular circumstances, and how restrictive the model policy should be. Supporters would generally favor clearer statewide standards and operational guidance for law enforcement, while critics would likely focus on surveillance, privacy, and potential overuse of unmanned aircraft systems. Because no discussion transcript was provided, the specific positions of legislators or stakeholders are not available in the record supplied here.