Can You Fly a Drone Over Private Property? What Federal Law Actually Says

Yes, in almost all cases. The federal government holds exclusive sovereignty over the airspace of the United States under 49 U.S.C. 40103, no federal rule requires a landowner's permission to fly above their property, and Part 107 sets no minimum altitude at all. What limits you is not the property line. It is 14 CFR 107.39, 107.23, and state law the FAA does not preempt.

That last sentence is where most of the advice on this question falls apart. Search it and you get pages written for the angry homeowner, or a state-by-state list that treats every statute as if it settles the question. Neither tells you, the person holding the controller on a paid job, what you can actually do on Tuesday morning over a roof you do not own.

Who owns the airspace over a house?

Not the homeowner, at least not in the sense they usually mean.

Congress gave the federal government exclusive sovereignty of US airspace, and gave citizens a public right of transit through the navigable airspace, in 49 U.S.C. 40103. The FAA's 2023 fact sheet on state and local regulation of UAS goes further and states the agency has exclusive authority to regulate aviation safety and the efficient use of airspace at any altitude. Not above 500 feet. Any altitude.

So a city ordinance banning drones below 200 feet, or a homeowners' association rule setting a minimum overflight height, is regulating the thing the FAA says only the FAA regulates. The fact sheet lists exactly that category as likely preempted, alongside designated drone "routes", mandated geofencing, and local licensing schemes.

Here is the honest caveat almost nobody includes. The FAA asserting authority over all altitudes is not the same as a court having ruled that a landowner has no interest whatsoever in the fifty feet above their lawn. That question has not been cleanly resolved. What is settled is that the FAA, not the landowner, decides where aircraft may fly. What is unsettled is how far a property owner's separate, non-aviation claim can reach into low airspace. You can be entirely legal under Part 107 and still be a defendant.

How low can you fly a drone over private property?

There is no floor in Part 107. None.

This surprises people who know the manned-aircraft rule. Under 14 CFR 91.119, a manned pilot must stay 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle in a congested area, and 500 feet above the surface elsewhere. That section does not apply to a Part 107 operation. Your rulebook gives you a ceiling of 400 feet AGL in 14 CFR 107.51, and says nothing about a minimum.

Flying at 30 feet along a gutter line is legal. What constrains you at that height is a different set of sections:

Note what that table implies about a residential neighborhood. The property line is not the problem. The neighbor standing in their yard watching you is the problem, because 107.39 attaches to the human being, not to the parcel. Our breakdown of the four categories for flight over people covers which aircraft can be overhead lawfully and which cannot.

What state and local law can still reach

The FAA's preemption claim covers aviation safety and airspace efficiency. It does not cover everything, and the 2023 fact sheet says so directly. States remain free to legislate on:

The line the FAA draws between the two columns is worth reading carefully, because it is more nuanced than the summaries suggest. The agency's example: a privacy rule banning drones over an entire city is likely preempted, but a ban on low-altitude flight over parks and schools, where people have an expectation of privacy, likely is not.

Roughly forty-plus states have enacted UAS legislation since 2013. Several created a specific aerial trespass or surveillance offense, often keyed to flying below a stated height over private land, or to capturing images of a person on their own property without consent. Those statutes are not airspace rules, they are privacy and trespass rules that happen to mention altitude, and they are the ones most likely to survive a preemption challenge.

Practical consequence: your certificate is federal, your liability is local. Read your own state's statute before you sell aerial work, and read the client's county and municipal code if the job is in a park, a school zone, or near a correctional or critical facility.

The 83-foot myth, and where it comes from

You will see it repeated everywhere: property rights end at 83 feet, so fly above that and you are untouchable. It is wrong, and it is a misreading of a single 1946 case.

In United States v. Causby, 328 U.S. 256, a North Carolina chicken farmer sued after military aircraft began flying the approach path to a nearby airport directly over his farm. The glide path crossed his land at 83 feet, which put the aircraft 67 feet above his house and 18 feet above his tallest tree. The noise killed roughly 150 chickens and ended his business. The Supreme Court held that this was a taking, reasoning that a landowner must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the atmosphere above the land if they are to enjoy the land at all.

Read what the Court did and did not do. It rejected the old ad coelum doctrine that property extends indefinitely upward. It did not announce that ownership stops at 83 feet. Eighty-three feet was simply how low those particular bombers were flying over that particular farm. The operative phrase is "immediate reaches", which is deliberately undefined and fact-dependent.

So there is no magic number to climb above. A brief transit at 60 feet is a weaker case against you than an hour of hovering at 120 feet outside a bedroom window, and altitude is only one of the facts a court would weigh.

What this means when you are actually working

Most of the exposure on a commercial job is avoidable with about ninety seconds of planning.

Before you quote the job. Confirm you are not launching or landing on land you have no permission to be on. Part 107 does not regulate where you stand, but trespass law does, and standing on the client's driveway is not the same as standing on the neighbor's. Get a launch point in writing if the site is tight.

Before you fly. Check that the flight can be completed within visual line of sight from the launch point. A roof inspection on a corner lot often cannot, and the fix is a second position, not a longer squint.

Plan the path, not just the target. You are allowed to overfly the neighbor's yard. You will be complained about anyway. Route the transit over the street, the client's own parcel, or open ground where you can, and reserve the low work for the property you were hired to capture.

Talk to people before they film you. A thirty-second explanation, a business card and a visible certificate defuses almost every confrontation that would otherwise become a police call. Carry your remote pilot certificate, because 14 CFR 107.7 requires you to present it on request from the FAA, and in practice a deputy wants to see it too.

Point the camera at the job. Almost every state statute that creates a drone-specific offense is written around image capture of people or of a residence, not around the overflight itself. A gimbal pointed at the client's roof is a very different exhibit from one panning across a fence line.

Frequently asked questions

Can my neighbor fly a drone over my yard?

Generally yes. The airspace above your property is regulated by the FAA, not by you, and no federal rule requires a neighbor to ask permission or to stay above a set height. Your remedies, if any, come from state trespass, nuisance, harassment or voyeurism law rather than from aviation regulation.

Do you need permission to fly a drone over someone's property?

Not under federal law. Nothing in 14 CFR Part 107 conditions a flight on the landowner's consent. Some state statutes do create an offense for low flight or image capture over private land without consent, so check your state, and get written permission when a job requires sustained low work over a parcel you were not hired for.

Can you sue someone for flying a drone over your house?

You can bring a claim, usually framed as trespass, nuisance or invasion of privacy, and some states have a purpose-built cause of action. Success typically turns on altitude, duration, repetition and whether images of people were captured, not on the overflight alone. A single brief transit at height is rarely actionable.

Can I shoot down a drone spying on my property?

No. The FAA states plainly that shooting at an unmanned aircraft is illegal and can bring a civil penalty plus federal, state or local criminal charges. A drone is an aircraft, and 18 U.S.C. 32, the Aircraft Sabotage Act, criminalizes damaging or disabling one. Report the operation to local law enforcement instead.

Is it illegal to fly a drone over private property and take pictures?

The flight itself is federally lawful, but the photography may not be. Several states criminalize using a drone to capture images of a person or a residence without consent, and voyeurism statutes are expressly outside the FAA's preemption. Shoot the subject you were hired to shoot and the risk drops close to zero.

How high do property rights extend above land?

There is no fixed figure. United States v. Causby rejected the idea that ownership runs indefinitely upward and said a landowner controls the "immediate reaches" of the airspace, without defining that height. The 83 feet often quoted was the altitude of the aircraft in that case, not a legal boundary.

Want to know whether the rest of the regulations are as solid in your head as this one? The free readiness assessment draws from all five knowledge areas and tells you where you actually stand before you book the test.

Sources

• State and Local Regulation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems, FAA fact sheet
• 14 CFR 107.39 — Operation over human beings
• 14 CFR 107.51 — Operating limitations for small unmanned aircraft
• 14 CFR 107.23 — Hazardous operation
• 14 CFR 107.19 — Remote pilot in command
• 14 CFR 91.119 — Minimum safe altitudes, general
• What To Know About Drones, FAA newsroom
• United States v. Causby, 328 U.S. 256 (1946)