Hawaii
Hawaii Drone Laws 2026: Trespass, Privacy & Warrants
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 17, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 17, 2026. · 4 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Hawaii makes it a crime to fly a drone within 50 feet of someone's home to harass them, and a misdemeanor to use one to record a person in a private place, which rises to a class C felony only when the recording captures that person in a stage of undress or sexual activity. A separate 2024 chapter of the penal code adds felony offenses governing how a drone is flown and equipped. None of these statutes requires police to get a warrant first; that question is left to the state and federal constitutions.
This page covers Hawaii's drone-trespass statute, its general privacy statutes as they apply to drones, the 2024 misuse-of-uncrewed-aircraft offenses, the state of law-enforcement warrant requirements, and the federal ban on shooting down a drone. It does not cover FAA flight-operation rules like registration or Remote ID, which apply the same way nationwide. For camera-based surveillance generally, see Recording Law's surveillance camera laws guide; for how other states handle drones, see the Drone Laws hub.
Who regulates drones in Hawaii: the federal and state split
The FAA owns Hawaii's airspace: altitude, registration, commercial pilot certification under 14 CFR Part 107, and Remote ID. A federal district court made that division explicit when it struck down a Massachusetts city's own altitude and registration rules in Singer v. City of Newton, 284 F. Supp. 3d 125 (D. Mass. 2017). States retain authority over areas that the FAA guidance quoted in that case describes as traditionally related to state and local police power, such as privacy and trespass; the court also held, however, that a local rule restricting how a drone is flown (a visual-line-of-sight requirement) was preempted. Hawaii's legislature acted on that authority relatively recently, telling lawmakers in 2023 that "Hawaii's laws do not adequately address" drone-specific privacy and safety concerns before passing the state's first dedicated drone statute, enacted as HRS § 711-1114 and renumbered in 2024 as HRS § 711-1125, its current section number. It went considerably further the next year: Act 161, Session Laws of Hawaii 2024, added an entirely new Part II to chapter 711, HRS §§ 711-1120 to 711-1124, creating a set of felony offenses for the misuse of an uncrewed aircraft.

Can someone fly a drone over your property in Hawaii and film you?
Two statutes work together here, and neither one is limited to drones alone. HRS § 711-1125, Hawaii's trespass-with-an-unmanned-aircraft-system law (renumbered from § 711-1114 in 2024), makes it a misdemeanor to intentionally cause a drone to cross a property line and come within 50 feet of a dwelling either to coerce, intimidate, or harass another person, or, after the operator has been given actual notice to desist, for any other reason at all. The same section separately reaches a drone that takes off or lands in violation of current FAA special security instructions or uncrewed-aircraft security-sensitive airspace restrictions. It is a defense that the person with legal authority over the property consented to the flight, or that the operator was flying under federal authorization in an otherwise lawful, federally compliant manner.
Beyond the 50-foot trespass line, Hawaii's general privacy statutes apply to a drone the same way they would apply to a person with a handheld camera. HRS § 711-1111, violation of privacy in the second degree, makes it unlawful to install or use a device, including a drone, to observe, record, or broadcast someone in a private place without their consent. A private place is defined as somewhere a person may reasonably expect to be safe from casual or hostile intrusion. A violation of HRS § 711-1111 is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $2,000 fine. Recording or disclosing images of someone nude or engaged in sexual activity is a separate, more serious offense under a different statute, discussed next.
That more serious conduct is separately covered by HRS § 711-1110.9, violation of privacy in the first degree, a class C felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine. It reaches both the act of secretly recording someone nude or during sexual activity and the malicious disclosure of an intimate image without consent. Hawaii's Chapter 711 privacy crimes do not themselves create a civil right of action. A related statute, HRS § 803-48, gives a person whose wire, oral, or electronic communication was unlawfully accessed, intercepted, disclosed, or used a separate civil claim for statutory damages of at least $10,000 or actual damages, whichever is greater, plus punitive damages and attorney's fees, but that remedy is scoped to communications interception, not drone photography or video by itself. A drone-surveillance victim outside that scope would more likely need to bring a common-law claim, such as intrusion upon seclusion.
Before Act 58 passed in 2023, Hawaii had no statute addressing this fact pattern directly. In August 2018, a drone hovered for an extended period outside a resident's window at Kukui Plaza in downtown Honolulu; the resident, who had a young child and often kept her windows open, called it "an invasion of privacy," and Honolulu Police Deputy Chief John McCarthy publicly acknowledged the conduct looked suspicious but said state law gave officers little to work with beyond ordinary trespass and voyeurism statutes. That gap is close to what the legislature cited five years later when it created § 711-1114, the provision now renumbered as § 711-1125.
Hawaii's 2024 drone-operation crimes: HRS §§ 711-1120 to 711-1124
Act 161, Session Laws of Hawaii 2024, added a new Part II to chapter 711, titled "Uncrewed Aircraft." It does not regulate what a drone records or how close it comes to a dwelling. It regulates how the aircraft itself is flown and equipped, and every graded offense in it is a felony.
Misuse of an uncrewed aircraft in the first degree, HRS § 711-1121, is a class A felony. It covers equipping or arming a drone with a firearm, explosive, electric gun, or weapon of mass destruction; possessing, receiving, transferring, operating, or producing a drone so equipped; discharging such a weapon using a drone; operating a drone so as to interfere with or disrupt the operation of a manned aircraft; using a drone to bring contraband, drugs, or dangerous instruments into a prison; and operating a drone so as to cause serious bodily injury.
Misuse of an uncrewed aircraft in the second degree, HRS § 711-1122, is a class B felony. It covers disabling a drone's required identification transmission or signaling, disabling or obscuring anti-collision lighting or failing to illuminate it as FAA rules require, operating a drone so as to cause substantial bodily injury, and damaging another person's property without consent in an amount exceeding $20,000.
Misuse of an uncrewed aircraft in the third degree, HRS § 711-1123, is a class C felony, and it is the provision most likely to reach an ordinary recreational flight gone wrong. It covers removing, obliterating, altering, or tampering with a drone's identification or registration number; operating a drone so as to obstruct, impair, or hinder a police officer, deputy sheriff, or fire department personnel; causing bodily injury; damaging another person's property without consent by more than $750; operating a drone while under the influence of an intoxicant; operating after a license, certificate, or privilege to operate has been revoked, suspended, or restricted; and using a drone in furtherance of a felony. The intoxication standard is borrowed from Hawaii's impaired-driving statute, HRS § 291E-1, with "uncrewed aircraft" substituted for "vehicle."
Each of those three sections exempts police officers, deputy sheriffs, corrections staff, and fire department personnel acting within the course and scope of their duties, along with anyone acting under the authority of or under contract with a federal, state, or county government. HRS § 711-1124 then overrides those exemptions on a single point: an uncrewed aircraft must be directly operated by a human operator at all times. That section states the requirement without assigning it a penalty grade of its own.
Does police need a warrant to fly a drone over your property in Hawaii?
Hawaii has not enacted a statute that specifically requires a warrant before a law enforcement agency uses a drone. A 2016 bill, SB 2347, would have created one, but it did not advance out of committee. Absent a dedicated statute, the baseline is ordinary constitutional search-and-seizure law: the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 7 of the Hawaii Constitution, which Hawaii courts have at times read to protect privacy interests more broadly than federal case law does. Under that framework, police generally need a warrant based on probable cause before a drone flight rises to the level of a "search," such as hovering to observe inside the curtilage of a home, subject to recognized exceptions for emergencies, search and rescue, and similar exigent circumstances.
That statutory gap has become a live issue rather than an abstract one. In early 2026, the state Department of Law Enforcement proposed a Waikiki-specific drone-surveillance pilot, with a launch pad planned atop the Waikiki Grand Hotel and deployment targeted for as soon as March 2026. Members of the Waikiki Neighborhood Board and the ACLU of Hawaii raised concerns about that proposal, warning that continuous aerial monitoring without a dedicated statutory warrant requirement risks becoming, in the ACLU's words, "pervasive, suspicionless, mass aerial surveillance." That Waikiki-specific proposal has not been confirmed as launched. What did launch, on August 5, 2026, is a related but geographically separate program: the Honolulu Police Department, in partnership with the state Department of Law Enforcement, began a Drone as First Responder pilot covering two other Honolulu patrol districts, Downtown/Chinatown/Ala Moana/Kakaako and Kalihi/Iwilei, not Waikiki. A 2025 law, HB 550, lets drone video establish probable cause for an arrest in one narrow context, fireworks violations captured over public property, but does not create a general drone-warrant rule.
A niche restriction: drones and Hawaii's marine waters
Hawaii bans using a drone to fish. HRS § 188-23.5 makes it unlawful to possess or use a drone on, in, or near state marine waters for the purpose of taking aquatic life, unless the operator first obtains a permit from the Department of Land and Natural Resources; the statute allows a drone to be used for simple reconnaissance without a permit. A violation is a misdemeanor, and DLNR's Division of Conservation and Resources Enforcement actively enforces it. In April 2025, officers arrested a Kihei man at Keawakapu Beach on Maui after finding him fishing with a drone and, in the course of that stop, discovered marijuana, hashish, and drug paraphernalia, adding narcotics charges to the drone-fishing citation.
Can you legally shoot down a drone over your Hawaii property?
No. Federal law makes it a serious felony to shoot down, disable, or otherwise damage any drone, anywhere, including over the shooter's own property, because the FAA controls the national airspace rather than the landowner below it. 18 U.S.C. § 32, the Aircraft Sabotage Act, criminalizes willfully damaging or destroying an "aircraft," a category the FAA has treated drones as falling into since 2012, and a conviction carries up to 20 years in federal prison. No state, including Hawaii, has passed a law giving a property owner the right to disable a drone as a matter of self-help; publicized cases from other states where local prosecutors dropped or reduced state charges after a shoot-down are not evidence that doing so is legal.
This article provides general legal information about Hawaii's drone-related laws as of mid-2026. It is not legal advice. For a specific dispute, consult a Hawaii attorney or the appropriate law enforcement agency.
More Hawaii Laws
- Hawaii Data Privacy Laws
- Hawaii GPS Tracking Laws
- Hawaii Police Bodycam Laws
- Hawaii Recording Laws
- Hawaii Smart Glasses Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can my neighbor fly a drone close to my house in Hawaii?
Not if it comes within 50 feet of your dwelling to coerce, intimidate, or harass you, or if it does so after you have told the operator to stop. HRS § 711-1125 (renumbered from § 711-1114 in 2024) makes that a misdemeanor, regardless of the operator's reason for the flight after notice to desist has been given.
Is it illegal to use a drone to record someone in Hawaii?
Yes, if the person is in a private place and has not consented. HRS § 711-1111 makes that a misdemeanor, or a felony if the recording shows the person nude or engaged in sexual activity, in which case HRS § 711-1110.9 applies instead.
Is it illegal to fly a drone while drunk in Hawaii?
Yes. Operating an uncrewed aircraft while under the influence of an intoxicant is misuse of an uncrewed aircraft in the third degree under HRS § 711-1123, a class C felony. The same section also makes it a class C felony to cause bodily injury with a drone, to damage another person's property by more than $750, to tamper with a drone's identification or registration number, to obstruct a police officer or fire department personnel, or to use a drone in furtherance of a felony.
Does Hawaii police need a warrant to fly a drone over my property?
Hawaii has no statute that specifically requires one. A 2016 bill that would have created a drone-warrant rule did not pass, so ordinary Fourth Amendment and Hawaii constitutional search-and-seizure law applies instead.
Can I sue someone who filmed me with a drone in Hawaii?
It depends. Hawaii's Chapter 711 privacy statutes are criminal laws without their own civil remedy. A related statute, HRS § 803-48, provides a civil claim for statutory damages of at least $10,000 or actual damages, whichever is greater, plus punitive damages and attorney's fees, but only for unlawfully accessing, intercepting, disclosing, or using a wire, oral, or electronic communication, not drone photography or video by itself. A drone-surveillance victim outside that scope would more likely need to bring a common-law claim, such as intrusion upon seclusion.
Is drone fishing legal in Hawaii?
Not without a permit. HRS § 188-23.5 bans using a drone to take aquatic life in or near Hawaii's state marine waters unless the operator has a permit from the Department of Land and Natural Resources, though simple reconnaissance flights are allowed.
Can I shoot down a drone flying over my property in Hawaii?
No. Shooting down any drone is a federal felony under 18 U.S.C. § 32 no matter whose property it is over, because federal law controls the national airspace rather than the landowner below it.
Updates
Corrected the description of Singer v. City of Newton: the court held a local rule on how drones are flown was preempted, and cited FAA guidance that privacy and trespass laws generally remain with states.
Corrected the opening summary, which described recording someone in a private place as a felony when Hawaii grades that a misdemeanor unless the recording captures undress or sexual activity, and added Hawaii's 2024 drone-operation crimes (HRS §§ 711-1120 to 711-1124), which the page had not covered.
Corrected a civil-damages remedy that had been misattributed to Hawaii's Chapter 711 privacy-crime statutes (it actually belongs to a separate wiretap-interception statute, HRS 803-48); clarified that HRS 711-1111 and 711-1110.9 are two separate statutes rather than one with a built-in felony escalation; and updated the Waikiki drone-surveillance discussion to reflect that Hawaii's first drone-as-first-responder pilot launched August 5, 2026, in two other Honolulu districts, while the original Waikiki-specific proposal remains unconfirmed as launched.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected Hawaii's drone-trespass statute citation: HRS Section 711-1114 was renumbered as Section 711-1125 in 2024 (Act 161); updated every in-text reference, KeyTakeaways, the FAQ, and the Sources citation to the current section number.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 711: OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER
§ 711-1125Trespass with an unmanned aircraft systemIn force
(1) A person commits the offense of trespass with an unmanned aircraft system if the person intentionally causes an unmanned aircraft system to: (a) Cross the property line of another and come within fifty feet of a dwelling to coerce, intimidate, or harass another person or, after having been given actual notice to desist, for any other reason; or (b) Take off or land in violation of current Federal Aviation Administration special security instructions or unmanned aircraft systems security sensitive airspace restrictions. (2) This section shall not apply if: (a) Consent was given to the entry by any person with legal authority to consent or by any person who is lawfully present on the property; or (b) The person was authorized by federal regulations to operate an unmanned aircraft system and was operating the system in an otherwise lawful manner and consistent with federal regulations. (3) Trespass with an unmanned aircraft system is a misdemeanor. [L 2023, c 58, §2]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
§ 711-1110.9Violation of privacy in the first degreeIn forcecited in 18 of our articles
(1) A person commits the offense of violation of privacy in the first degree if, except in the execution of a public duty or as authorized by law: (a) The person intentionally or knowingly installs or uses, or both, in any private place, without consent of the person or persons entitled to privacy therein, any device for observing, recording, amplifying, or broadcasting another person in a stage of undress or sexual activity in that place; (b) The person knowingly discloses or threatens to disclose an image or video of another identifiable person either in the nude, as defined in section 712‑1210, or engaging in sexual conduct, as defined in section 712-1210, without the consent of the depicted person, with intent to harm substantially the depicted person with respect to that person's health, safety, business, calling, career, education, financial condition, reputation, or personal relationships or as an act of revenge or retribution; or (c) The person intentionally creates or discloses or threatens to disclose an image or video of a composite fictitious person depicted in the nude as defined in section 712-1210, or engaged in sexual conduct as defined in section 712-1210, that…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-03 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
Cited in 7 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Hawaii courts have construed HRS 711-1110.9 in the Kaakimaka litigation. State v. Kaakimaka (2026) held subsection (1)(a) requires the device, or the person using it, to be inside the private place, and reversed a conviction where the phone stayed outside. A 2025 Kaakimaka opinion upheld the charge as drawn.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Kaakimaka (Hawaii Supreme Court 2026)✓A man stood outside a vacation home and aimed his phone at a bathroom window where a 15-year-old was showering; the court held the statute requires the device or the person using it to be inside the private place, found the evidence insufficient, and reversed the conviction.
- State v. Kaakimaka. ICA s.d.o., filed 01/31/2025 [ada], 155 Haw. 297. Opinion by Hiraoka, J. Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part. Opinion by Guidry J. Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part. Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 05/16/2025. S.Ct. Order Accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 06/23/2025. S.Ct. Amended Order Accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 06/23/2025 [ada]. (Hawaii Supreme Court 2025)✓Charged with recording a girl showering, the defendant argued his indictment was defective because it did not define "private place"; the court held that term is an attendant circumstance whose statutory definition need not be alleged, and upheld the charge.
- State v. Olive (Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals 2025)“…and (b). These offenses are classified as Class C felonies. HRS § 711-1110.9(2) (2014 & 2018 Supp.). HR…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Hawaii Recording Laws (2026): Hybrid Consent State Rules, Hawaii Smart Glasses Recording Laws (2026), Hawaii Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties
§ 711-1111Violation of privacy in the second degreeIn forcecited in 20 of our articles
(1) A person commits the offense of violation of privacy in the second degree if, except in the execution of a public duty or as authorized by law, the person intentionally: (a) Trespasses on property for the purpose of subjecting anyone to eavesdropping or other surveillance in a private place; (b) Peers or peeps into a window or other opening of a dwelling or other structure adapted for sojourn or overnight accommodations for the purpose of spying on the occupant thereof or invading the privacy of another person with a lewd or unlawful purpose, under circumstances in which a reasonable person in the dwelling or other structure would not expect to be observed; (c) Trespasses on property for the sexual gratification of the actor; (d) Installs or uses, or both, in any private place, without consent of the person or persons entitled to privacy therein, any means or device for observing, recording, amplifying, or broadcasting sounds or events in that place other than another person in a stage of undress or sexual activity; provided that this paragraph shall not prohibit a person from making a video or audio recording or taking a photograph of a law enforcement officer while the…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
Cited in 10 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Hawaii decisions have construed HRS 711-1111 mainly alongside neighboring statutes. State v. Kaakimaka (2026) read subsections (1)(d) and (1)(e) as an inside and outside pair while construing the first-degree offense. State v. Lee (1984) treated 711-1111(1) as drawn from Model Penal Code 250.12 in reading the wiretap statute.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Lee (Hawaii Supreme Court 1984, 67 Haw. 307)✓An undercover officer wearing a recorder taped conversations in a doctor's private office; construing the wiretap consent provision drawn from HRS 711-1111(1)(b) and (c), the court held a body-worn device is not an "installation" in a private place, so the tapes were admissible.
- State v. Kaakimaka (Hawaii Supreme Court 2026)“…711-1110.9 and second degree violation of privacy under HRS § 711-1111 (2014 & Supp. 2025) convinces me that…”
- State v. Lester (Hawaii Supreme Court 1982, 64 Haw. 659)“…The Code provision covering wiretapping and eavesdropping, HRS § 711-1111, permits "consensual eavesdropping".…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Hawaii Dashcam Laws: Recording Rules, Audio Consent, and Legal Limits (2026), Hawaii Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights, HIPAA, and Consent Rules (2026), Hawaii Phone Call Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules for Calls
§ 711-1121Misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the first degreeIn force
(1) A person commits the offense of misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the first degree if the person intentionally or knowingly: (a) Equips or arms an uncrewed aircraft with a firearm, explosive, electric gun, or weapon of mass destruction; (b) Possesses, receives, transfers, operates, or produces an uncrewed aircraft that is equipped or armed with a firearm, explosive, electric gun, or weapon of mass destruction; (c) Discharges or deploys a firearm, explosive, electric gun, or weapon of mass destruction using an uncrewed aircraft; (d) Operates an uncrewed aircraft and thereby intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly interferes with or disrupts the operation of any manned aircraft; (e) Uses an uncrewed aircraft to transport and introduce, or to attempt to transport and introduce, contraband, drugs, or dangerous instruments into a prison; or (f) Operates an uncrewed aircraft and thereby causes serious bodily injury to another person. (2) Misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the first degree is a class A felony.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
§ 711-1122Misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the second degreeIn force
(1) A person commits the offense of misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the second degree if the person intentionally or knowingly: (a) Disables any required identification transmission or signaling of an uncrewed aircraft; (b) Disables or obscures any anti-collision lighting of an uncrewed aircraft or fails to have or illuminate the lighting as required by law or by the rules, regulations, and orders of the Federal Aviation Administration; (c) Operates an uncrewed aircraft and thereby causes substantial bodily injury to another person; or (d) Operates an uncrewed aircraft and thereby damages the property of another, without the other's consent, in an amount exceeding $20,000. (2) Misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the second degree is a class B felony. (3) This section shall not apply to any police officer, deputy sheriff, adult corrections officer, correctional worker, or fire department personnel acting within the course and scope of their duties, or to any other person acting under the authority of, or pursuant to a contract with, the United States or a state or county government, or any department or agency of the United States or a state or county government.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
§ 711-1123Misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the third degreeIn force
(1) A person commits the offense of misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the third degree if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly: (a) Removes, obliterates, alters, or tampers with the identification or registration number of an uncrewed aircraft; (b) Operates an uncrewed aircraft and thereby obstructs, impairs, or hinders the performance of a police officer, deputy sheriff, or fire department personnel acting under color of their official authority; (c) Operates an uncrewed aircraft and thereby causes bodily injury to another person; (d) Operates an uncrewed aircraft and thereby damages the property of another, without the other's consent, in an amount exceeding $750; (e) Operates an uncrewed aircraft while under the influence of an intoxicant; (f) Operates an uncrewed aircraft after the person's license, certificate, or privilege to operate an uncrewed aircraft has been revoked, suspended, or otherwise restricted by the issuing governmental authority; or (g) Uses an uncrewed aircraft in furtherance of the commission of a felony. (2) Misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the third degree is a class C felony.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
§ 711-1124Uncrewed aircraft; operationIn force
Notwithstanding section 711-1121(3), 711-1122(3), and 711-1123(3), uncrewed aircraft shall be directly operated by a human operator at all times. [L 2024, c 161, pt of §1]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
§ 711-1120DefinitionsIn force
As used in this part: "Aircraft" means any device, craft, vehicle, or contrivance that is invented, used, or designed to navigate, fly, or travel in the air, or that is used or intended to be used for flight in the air. "Uncrewed aircraft" means any aircraft that is operated or designed to be operated without a person in or on the aircraft, or without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft. [L 2024, c 161, pt of §1]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 188: FISHING RIGHTS AND REGULATIONS
§ 188-23.5Possession or use of unmanned aerial vehicles on, in, or near state marine waters prohibited; exceptionIn force
(a) It is unlawful to possess or use on, in, or near state marine waters, any unmanned aerial vehicles, for the purpose of taking aquatic life, except under the terms and conditions of a permit first obtained by the user from the department of land and natural resources; provided that unmanned aerial vehicles may be used for the purpose of simple reconnaissance. The department of land and natural resources may issue permits for the possession or use of unmanned aerial vehicles consistent with other legal requirements. (b) As used in this section, "unmanned aerial vehicle" means any aerial vehicle that is operated without the possibility of direct human intervention within or on the aerial vehicle. [L 2022, c 207, §1]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
United States Code Title 18
§ 32Destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilitiesIn forcecited in 51 of our articles
Whoever willfully— sets fire to, damages, destroys, disables, or wrecks any aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States or any civil aircraft used, operated, or employed in interstate, overseas, or foreign air commerce; places or causes to be placed a destructive device or substance in, upon, or in proximity to, or otherwise makes or causes to be made unworkable or unusable or hazardous to work or use, any such aircraft, or any part or other materials used or intended to be used in connection with the operation of such aircraft, if such placing or causing to be placed or such making or causing to be made is likely to endanger the safety of any such aircraft; sets fire to, damages, destroys, or disables any air navigation facility, or interferes by force or violence with the operation of such facility, if such fire, damaging, destroying, disabling, or interfering is likely to endanger the safety of any such aircraft in flight; with the intent to damage, destroy, or disable any such aircraft, sets fire to, damages, destroys, or disables or places a destructive device or substance in, upon, or in proximity to, any appliance or structure, ramp, landing area,…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 168 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):United States v. Yousef (2003) applied 18 U.S.C. 32 to an overseas airline bombing plot, holding Section 32(a) reaches conduct abroad because US-flag aircraft in flight are within the special aircraft jurisdiction, and that a defendant brought here involuntarily is still found in the United States under Section 32(b).
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Perez v. United States (Supreme Court of the United States 1971, 402 U.S. 146)“…commerce, as, for example, the destruction of an aircraft ( 18 U. S. C. § 32 ), or persons or things in commerce, as…”
- Stanford v. Kentucky (Supreme Court of the United States 1989, 492 U.S. 361)“…r by persons subject to Uniform Code of Military Justice); 18 U. S. C. §§ 32 , 33, and 34 (1982 ed. and Supp. V) (de…”
- United States v. Yousef (Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 2003, 327 F.3d 56)✓Yousef bombed a Philippine airliner and plotted to bomb twelve US flag airliners on Asian routes; the court held Section 32(a) reaches attacks on US flag aircraft worldwide, and that Yousef, brought here involuntarily, was found in the United States under Section 32(b).
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Indiana Drone Laws (2026): Police Warrants, Voyeurism, Hunting, Iowa Drone Laws: Homestead, Farmstead & Warrant Rules, Kansas Drone Laws: Stalking Act & Privacy Rules Explained
United States Code Title 49
§ 44809Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraftIn forcecited in 13 of our articles
Except as provided in subsection (e), and notwithstanding chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code, a person may operate a small unmanned aircraft without specific certification or operating authority from the Federal Aviation Administration if the operation adheres to all of the following limitations: The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes. The aircraft is operated in accordance with or within the programming of a community-based organization’s set of safety guidelines that are developed in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration. The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co-located and in direct communication with the operator. The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft. In Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace or within the lateral boundaries of the surface area of Class E airspace designated for an airport, the operator obtains prior authorization from the Administrator or designee before operating and complies with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Tyler Brennan v. Stephen Dickson (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 2022, 45 F.4th 48)“…Reauthorization Act, § 349(a), (b), (f), 132 Stat. at 3297; 49 U.S.C. § 44809(f); see Final Rule, 86 Fed. Reg. at 440…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Illinois Drone Laws (2026): Police Warrants, Privacy, and Hunting, Florida Drone Laws 2026: Privacy, Warrants & Penalties, Idaho Drone Laws (2026): Privacy, Police Warrants, and Hunting Rules
Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 803: ARRESTS, SEARCHES, SEARCH WARRANTS
§ 803-48Recovery of civil damages authorizedIn forcecited in 15 of our articles
Any person whose wire, oral, or electronic communication is accessed, intercepted, disclosed, or used in violation of this part shall[:] (1) Have a civil cause of action against any person who accesses, intercepts, discloses, or uses, or procures any other person to access, intercept, disclose, or use the communications[;] and (2) Be entitled to recover from any such person: (A) The greater of[:] (i) The sum of the actual damages suffered by the plaintiff and any profits made by the violator as a result of the violation[;] or (ii) Statutory damages of the greater of $100 a day for each day of violation or $10,000; (B) Punitive damages, where appropriate; and (C) A reasonable attorney's fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred. The aggrieved person may also seek and be awarded such preliminary, and other equitable or declaratory relief as may be appropriate. A good faith reliance on a court order shall constitute a complete defense to any civil action brought under this part. [L 1978, c 218, pt of §2; am L 1986, c 303, §8; am L 1989, c 164, §10; am L 2006, c 200, pt of §4]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
Also relied on in: Hawaii AI Meeting Recording Laws (2026), Hawaii Surveillance Camera Laws: Complete 2026 Guide, Hawaii Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Surveillance and Privacy Rights
Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 291E: USE OF INTOXICANTS WHILE OPERATING A VEHICLE
§ 291E-1DefinitionsIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires: "Administrative revocation" means termination of the respondent's license, and the privilege to operate a vessel underway on or in the waters of the State pursuant to part III, but does not include any revocation imposed under section 291E-61 or 291E-61.5. "Alcohol" means ethanol or any substance containing ethanol. "Alcohol concentration" means either grams of alcohol per one hundred milliliters or cubic centimeters of blood or grams of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of breath.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
Cited in 41 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Wheeler (Hawaii Supreme Court 2009, 121 Haw. 383)“…had “oper-at[ed]” the vehicle, and “operate” is defined in HRS § 291E-1 (2007) as operating a vehicle on a publ…”
- State v. Nesmith (Hawaii Supreme Court 2012, 127 Haw. 48)“…ough HRS § 291E- 61(a)(1) itself did not define “operate,” HRS § 291E-1 did, as follows: “to drive or assume…”
- Schwartz v. State. (Hawaii Supreme Court 2015, 136 Haw. 258)“…ry result”). Accordingly, our conclusion in Wheeler—that “HRS § 291E-1 [requires] that the defendant’s conduct…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Hawaii OVUII Laws: Penalties, BAC Limit & License (2026)
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Haw. Rev. Stat. § 711-1125, Trespass with an unmanned aircraft system (renumbered from § 711-1114 in 2024; added by Act 58, Session Laws of Hawaii 2023)(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
- Haw. Rev. Stat. § 711-1110.9, Violation of privacy in the first degree(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
- Haw. Rev. Stat. § 188-23.5, Possession or use of unmanned aerial vehicles on, in, or near state marine waters prohibited; exception(dlnr.hawaii.gov).gov
- Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, Hawaii recording law guide (HRS §§ 711-1111, 711-1110.9 privacy statutes)(rcfp.org)
- Honolulu Civil Beat, "A New Era Of Police Surveillance Is Coming To Hawai'i" (Waikiki drone-as-first-responder program)(civilbeat.org)
- Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, "Maui Fisher Busted for Drone and Narcotics Violations" (April 4, 2025)(dlnr.hawaii.gov).gov
- 18 U.S.C. § 32, Destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities (federal shoot-down prohibition)(law.cornell.edu)
- Singer v. City of Newton, 284 F. Supp. 3d 125 (D. Mass. 2017)(leagle.com)
- Haw. Rev. Stat. § 711-1120, Uncrewed aircraft; definitions (Part II of ch. 711, added by Act 161, Session Laws of Hawaii 2024)(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- Haw. Rev. Stat. § 711-1121, Misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the first degree (class A felony)(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- Haw. Rev. Stat. § 711-1122, Misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the second degree (class B felony)(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- Haw. Rev. Stat. § 711-1123, Misuse of uncrewed aircraft in the third degree (class C felony)(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- Haw. Rev. Stat. § 711-1124, Uncrewed aircraft; operation (human-operator requirement)(capitol.hawaii.gov)
- Haw. Rev. Stat. § 711-1111, Violation of privacy in the second degree (misdemeanor; subsection (1)(d) excludes undress and sexual activity)(capitol.hawaii.gov)