New COUNTER Act Exempts Drone Defense Tech from FOIA, Extends Key Oversight Deadlines to 2030

The newly introduced Comprehensive Operations for Unmanned-System Neutralization and Threat Elimination Response Act, or the COUNTER Act, is essentially a major update to how the Department of Defense (DoD) handles hostile drones, or Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS). This bill gives military commanders clearer, delegated authority to neutralize drone threats against U.S. assets, including the use of remote identification broadcasts to track and take down unauthorized aircraft. For the average person, this sounds like a necessary, technical update to national security, but the real-world impact lies in the fine print regarding who gets to know what and when.

The Brass Tacks: Who’s In Charge Now?

Section 2 of the COUNTER Act streamlines the chain of command, requiring the Secretary of Defense to delegate the authority for responding to drone threats to specific officials, like a unified combatant command or a Secretary of a military branch. This means faster decisions when a suspicious drone appears near a sensitive facility. The bill also explicitly expands the DoD’s ability to use these counter-drone measures not just for military assets, but also for general DoD buildings, grounds, and property where the public isn’t usually allowed. This clarification is meant to give the military a clearer playbook for protecting its installations and the personnel on them.

Expanding the Emergency Playbook

One significant expansion in the bill is how counter-drone technology can be used in domestic emergencies. The DoD can now assist federal, state, or local officials during emergencies involving nuclear, biological, chemical weapons (CBRN), high-yield explosives, or even general disaster relief efforts under the Stafford Act. This means if there’s a major disaster, the military’s counter-drone capabilities—which are usually reserved for high-security areas—could be deployed to help secure the perimeter or assist in response zones. While this sounds like a benefit for emergency response, the bill also includes a vague catch-all for “any time-limited emergency response,” which could be interpreted very broadly.

The Transparency Trade-Off: What We Won’t See

Here’s where the bill hits the brakes on public oversight. Section 2 explicitly states that any information about the technology, procedures, or rules the DoD uses to fight drone threats is now exempt from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and similar state and local laws. If you’re a journalist, a watchdog group, or just a concerned citizen trying to figure out exactly how the government is tracking or neutralizing drones—especially given the expanded domestic role—that information is now strictly confidential. This creates a significant black box around a rapidly evolving and powerful set of military capabilities, limiting the ability to scrutinize potential overreach or operational failures.

Pushing the Accountability Clock

Beyond keeping secrets, the COUNTER Act also pushes back several key administrative deadlines by years. For example, dates related to existing rules and reporting requirements are shifted from 2026 to 2030, and the deadline for certain reports is extended from 180 days to one year (Section 2, Changing Deadlines and Definitions). For those who care about government accountability, this means less frequent reporting to Congress and a longer wait for procedural reviews. The DoD gets more time to implement changes, but the public and Congress have to wait longer for the official check-ins.

Legal Cover Overseas

Finally, the bill gives the DoD and Coast Guard a clear pass regarding certain federal laws when they conduct counter-drone activities outside the United States. Specifically, laws related to hacking and certain other crimes (like sections 32, 1030, and 1367 of title 18) won't apply to these operations overseas. This provides necessary legal certainty for military operators working in foreign airspace, but it also raises questions about the scope of actions the U.S. military might take under the umbrella of 'counter-drone' operations without the constraint of U.S. anti-hacking laws.