Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) owned by hard-working business owners across this country are not the property of the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) or the government. It’s no laughing matter, then, that the FAA’s Notice of Proposed Rule-Making (NPRM) requiring remote identification (RID), will inevitably impact the property rights, economic opportunities, and livelihoods of many. Whose claim is superior in this instance: mine (the individual) or mine (the government)? To reframe the question: does the proposed RID rule violate the 5th Amendment’s prohibition on taking property for public use without just compensation, as some have suggested?
Topics: Unmanned aircraft systems; UAS; Federal Aviation Authority; FAA; Notice of Proposed Rule-Making; NPRM; remote identification; RID; 5th Amendment; Takings Clause;
Comments