A House and Senate proposal would allow certain private operators of Homeland Security-designated critical infrastructure to use counter-drone systems, a move supporters call necessary for national security and critics warn could extend government-style enforcement powers to major corporations.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
A Republican-backed proposal moving in both chambers of Congress would allow some private owners of critical infrastructure to use anti-drone technologies, opening a debate over whether facilities such as major AI data centers should be allowed to deploy weapons systems to defend against aerial threats.
The legislation, called the Critical Infrastructure Airspace Defense Act, was introduced in the House by Rep. Matt Van Epps, R-Tenn., and mirrors a Senate version from Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., according to a Daily Caller News Foundation report. The measure would give the Department of Homeland Security authority to approve certain private critical infrastructure operators to use counter-unmanned aircraft systems against credible drone threats.
Critical Infrastructure Airspace Act by yourNEWS Media
The bill comes as investors, public officials and critics debate the rapid expansion of AI data centers, the costs of protecting them and the broader effects they may have on energy grids, water supplies, local governments and residents.
Christabel Randolph, associate director at the Center for AI and Digital Policy, told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the legislation raises concerns before reaching any specific operational details.
“The foundational concern with legislation of this kind begins before any individual provision,” Randolph said. “The bill proposes a structural shift in governance: the privatization of a sovereign enforcement power — the authority to disable or destroy aircraft operating in national airspace — and its transfer to corporate actors with profit motives, competitive interests, and minimal public accountability. That shift alone should warrant deep skepticism.”
Cotton said AI data centers could fall under the proposal if federal officials determine they meet the bill’s threshold.
“AI data centers could potentially qualify as covered critical infrastructure facilities under the bill if the Department of Homeland Security, after consulting with the Department of Energy, designates them as high-risk sites,” Cotton told the DCNF. “The authority is based on affirmative designation rather than a fixed list of sectors, and large AI data centers’ significant energy consumption and national economic or security importance could support such a designation.”
Cotton said the bill includes protections intended to keep companies from misusing the authority.
“Multiple layered safeguards in the bill are designed to prevent abuse, overreach, or misuse by private companies or their contractors,” Cotton said. “Actions may only address a ‘credible threat’ to the facility.”
The Senate version states that the legislation would grant the “authority to use counter-unmanned aircraft system technologies to private owners of critical infrastructure facilities, and for other purposes.” Van Epps said those technologies could include electronic jamming, spoofing, directed-energy systems, projectile-based systems, net-capture systems and other tools designed to disable drones.
The proposal follows public comments from BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, who raised the question of how large data center investments would be protected as drone warfare becomes more prominent.
“If we’re going to be building, let’s say, these one-gigawatt data centers, how do we make sure we’re not protecting those 50 billion, 75 billion dollar investments?” Fink said during Global Conference 2026 on May 5.
Fink also said domestic drone threats should be considered.
“We have to relook at everything because of the role of drone warfare,” Fink said. “Right now we’re looking at it internationally, but you know, one of my concerns is could it be a domestic terrorism using a $3,000 drone?”
BlackRock’s AI Consortium agreed to buy Aligned Data Centers from Macquarie Asset Management in a deal worth $20 billion, The Wall Street Journal reported on Oct. 15, 2025. BlackRock did not respond to requests for comment, according to the submitted information.
The AI data center boom has generated major investment in infrastructure companies and helped create 16 new billionaires across technology firms, Bloomberg reported on Nov. 21, 2025.
The Department of Homeland Security, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the White House did not respond to requests for comment. A Department of Energy spokesperson told the DCNF that protecting energy systems is a priority.
“Securing our Nation’s energy infrastructure from physical and cyber threats is a top priority for the Department of Energy (DOE),” the spokesperson said. “[The] DOE welcomes congressional guidance and funding that would augment DOE’s ability to strengthen the security and resilience of the energy sector.”
Van Epps defended the measure as a response to potential attacks on essential facilities.
“A single drone attack on a chemical facility, electrical substation, or water treatment plant could trigger widespread economic consequences, disrupt vital services, and endanger countless Americans,” Van Epps told the DCNF. “That’s why this bill allowing critical infrastructure sites to employ defensive counter-drone technology is so important.”
In a Tuesday press release, Van Epps framed the proposal as a national security measure aimed at protecting facilities whose disruption could threaten public safety or critical services.
Critics, however, say the legislation could allow powerful companies to gain access to tools normally associated with government or military operations. Tucker Carlson questioned the premise behind protecting data center investments from domestic threats during an episode of The Tucker Carlson Show on May 13.
“Larry Fink is concerned that ordinary American citizens, as he just said, will use $3,000 drones to destroy these billion-dollar investments. Why would he be worried about that?” Carlson said. “But Larry Fink knows, in fact, he’s admitting that people know this is bad for them. So bad that they might be willing to commit an act of terrorism, a felony for which they could be imprisoned for a long time.”
Public support for rapid AI data center development remains limited, according to a Reuters and Ipsos poll of 4,531 U.S. adults. The poll, which had a margin of error of two percentage points, found that 33% of Americans support rapid development of AI data centers.
Water consumption is one of the leading concerns tied to data center expansion. A large data center can use up to 5 million gallons of water per day, an amount comparable to the daily water use of a town of 10,000 to 50,000 people, according to the Environmental and Energy Study Institute.
Electricity demand is also increasing. Data centers used about 4.4% of total U.S. electricity in 2023 and are projected to consume between 6.7% and 12% by 2028, according to a Department of Energy report released Dec. 20, 2024.
In Virginia, where data center development has expanded rapidly, unconstrained energy demand could rise 180% by 2040, according to the Virginia Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission. JLARC also identified noise pollution as a concern, noting that data centers can produce constant low-frequency noise that affects nearby residents’ well-being.
The expansion has already triggered local political backlash. Voters have ousted city council members over data center deals, while some local governments have moved toward outright bans.
Policy groups are also organizing around the issue. The AI Now Institute, which focuses on the social effects of artificial intelligence and the industry behind it, created a policy toolkit aimed at “stopping, slowing, and restricting rampant data center development in the US at the local and state level.” The group says data centers can contribute to pollution, higher energy prices, natural resource depletion and diversion of tax dollars from local priorities.
Randolph said the security benefits contemplated by the bill would likely flow to a small group of major technology companies.
“Moreover, the largest AI data centers in the United States are owned by a handful of companies — Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Meta, and a small number of hyperscale operators,” Randolph told the DCNF. “The result is a federally subsidized security perimeter for the most powerful corporations in the technology sector, paid for by taxpayers.”
Van Epps said DHS, working with other federal agencies, would determine the scope of training and the technologies used under the bill.
“Some of these technologies include electronic jamming, spoofing, directed-energy systems, projectile-based systems, net-capture systems, and other drone-disabling technologies,” Van Epps told the DCNF. “It will ultimately be up to the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with other departments, to determine the scope of this training and what technologies are used.”
Van Epps said implementation would require oversight from local and federal authorities. He said DHS would manage who receives access to counter-drone technologies and how those systems may be used. The Federal Aviation Administration would also be involved, along with state and local law enforcement.
A Pentagon official declined to comment on the measure.
“As a matter of policy, we do not comment on pending legislation,” the official told the DCNF.
Randolph warned that the bill could create a legal foundation for broader private-sector control over security tools, particularly if data centers are treated as national security assets.
“Granting AI data center operators counter-UAS authority on the theory that physical destruction of servers is a national security threat creates a legal and regulatory foundation that could subsequently be used to justify far broader uses by the companies which currently operate with little to no regulatory oversight,” Randolph said.
She also raised concerns about whether counter-drone systems could rely on artificial intelligence to detect, classify or respond to perceived threats.
“The key concern about all of these technologies is not necessarily their physical characteristics but the decision-making architecture,” Randolph told the DCNF. “Counter-UAS systems increasingly incorporate AI-enabled automated detection, classification, and automated response. A system that can identify and interdict a drone without human authorization and accountability represents a serious risk to democratic governance of national security technologies.”
“The current bill is shortsighted and misconceived at a structural level and should not proceed,” Randolph said.
Original article
Comments