OK To Shoot Down Cartel Drones Flying Over Border Sought By NORTHCOM Boss
The general in charge of defending U.S. skies from drone incursions wants the authority to be able to shoot them down near the Mexican border. Current law greatly restricts U.S. military counter-drone responses, which you can read more about in our deep dive here.
Air Force Gen. Gregory M. Guillot testified to the House Armed Services Committee on Tuesday that since President Donald Trump took office, he 'proposed…a change to the rule of force.' It would 'allow us to shoot down or bring down drones that are surveilling over our deployed and mobile troops…not just that are in self-defense, but anything that's surveilling and planning the next attack on us within five miles of the border.'
'Because they're mobile,' U.S. troops on the border are not allowed to take down drones under current law, Guillot, the commander of U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) and the joint U.S.-Canadian North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), added.
His testimony came as Mexican drug cartels have been steadily increasing their use of weaponized uncrewed aerial systems (UAS), as well as unarmed types for surveillance and smuggling. The issue has been so concerning that the U.S. Army recently deployed ground-based radars along the border to help spot and track drones as part of the continued build-up of U.S. military support there. You can read more about that in our in-depth story here. The Trump administration has made border security one of its major priorities.
The issue of drones flying over the border is not new. As we have reported in the past, pilots have reported seeing and having near misses with them in the skies near Arizona ranges and military bases for years.
Guillot also repeated his call to enable all Continental U.S. bases to take action against drones. He also wants to increase the range those actions can take place. At present, only about half of the 360 bases in the U.S. – considered 'covered installations' – even have permission to defend against drones.
'We're working with the services and with the [Defense] Department to increase not only the capability but also to expand the authorities,' Guillot explained. 'We have to knock out not only aircraft or UAS that are a direct threat, but also that are surveilling over the installation. I'd like to even see it expanded beyond the installation to ensure they can't see anything sensitive on our bases.'
Expanding the perimeter where counter-drone actions can take place also increases the chances of identifying and capturing the drone operators, Guillot explained.
Guillot testified that he wants increased ability to take action granted under a federal law known as '130(i).' The subsection of Title 10 of the U.S. Code (10 USC 130i) covers current authorities for the 'protection of certain facilities and assets from unmanned aircraft,' including through the use of kinetic and non-kinetic capabilities. It contains a number of specific stipulations and where and when those authorities can actually be employed, which you can read more about here.
Any change in those authorities, which Congress is considering, would be on top of the Pentagon's counter-drone strategy released in the last days of the Biden administration, which you can read more about here.
As we previously reported, the U.S. is not fielding kinetic and directed energy capabilities, such as laser and high-power microwave weapons, surface-to-air interceptors, and gun systems, to defend domestic bases and other critical infrastructure from rapidly growing and evolving drone threats. Instead, the focus is on electronic warfare and cyber warfare, and other 'soft-kill' options, at least for now.
The legal and regulatory hurdles limiting how and when counter-drone systems of any kind can be employed within the homeland are confusing even to the military and first responders.
Amid the frenzy of drone sightings reported over U.S. military and power facilities that we were the first to report about last November, runways at Stewart Airport in upstate New York were shut down because of a drone incursion in December. The airport is also home to an Air National Guard Base.
'Several very, very sizable drones came within 25 feet of our C-17 fleet,' said U.S. Rep. Pat Ryan during Tuesday's hearing.
Ryan said there was confusion at the time about how to respond. Base officials 'still don't have full clarity on authorities,' Ryan stated, adding that Stewart also lacks 'the tech and some of the other support pieces that they need.'
During the drone incursions over Langley Air Force Base in December 2023, which The War Zone was the first to report on, base officials were not given the authority to respond, the Congressman representing that district stated during the hearing.
The drones over Langley 'weren't trying to hide anything,' said U.S. Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA). 'I felt bad for the base commander because he wanted to do something and wasn't getting backing from folks up the chain of command. We had a bunch of resources there where we could do things. None of those were used. If it wasn't for NASA Langley next door, we wouldn't even have the sensors to be able to sense those unmanned aerial systems…'
That lack of response sent the wrong message to foreign adversaries who observed it, Wittman complained.
'I believe that our adversaries are probing, trying to figure out what we can do, what we can't do, and that's very telling to them what they saw that day or what they saw over that month,' he explained. 'It was very telling to them that there wasn't the type of reaction that was necessary.'
In the wake of the Langley incursion, NORTHCOM asked for and received 'responsibility to synchronize the DOD and if necessary, inter-agency response to counter UAS incursions,' Guillot told Wittman. 'During that time we conducted three assistive responses where we can use our new responsibilities to bring capabilities on a base similar to what you saw at Langley.'
He did not elaborate where or when those responses took place. NORTHCOM later told us Guillot was referring to Edwards Air Force Base,Vandenburg Space Force Base and Picatinny Arsenal.
While it is up to the military services and installations to defend the bases from drones, NORTHCOM is looking to surge counter-drone equipment to assist them in what Guillot calls 'flyaway kits' that include counter-drone equipment and the personnel to operate it.
'We don't have those kits yet, but we're in the process of acquiring' them, he told committee members.
Guillot's testimony and statements by legislators further highlight concerns about dangers posed by drones that The War Zone has been making for years. We laid out a detailed case through dozens of reports that adversaries were taking advantage of the lack of aerial domain awareness over and above the homeland. The issue has been complicated by the fact that unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), are also tied up in this deeply. You can read all about this here.
Congressional interest in mysterious UAS flying in the skies was further fueled by the so-called Jersey Drone craze. It began with sightings over Picatinny Arsenal and spread throughout the region to the point where the FBI fielded more than 5,000 reports. TWZ saw no evidence of large-scale drone incursions over New Jersey, with a chronic issue of people reporting normal aircraft as mysterious drones being glaringly apparent. The Biden administration repeatedly stated that there was no foreign connection to any of these flights. The Trump administration ultimately told the public that these drones were largely FAA-authorized or research-related.
During this period, U.S. air bases in England experienced a week-long spate of drones flying overhead, which The War Zone was also first to report. The origination of those drones and identity of their operators remains publicly unknown.
The Congressional reaction to Guillot's testimony seemed to heavily favor giving him more authority to shoot down drones near the border as well as all U.S. military installations. Given our long and leading interest in this topic, we will continue to monitor that progress.
Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
29 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump's support keeps growing while Democrats howl at the moon
California Sen. Alex Padilla recently crashed a press conference by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. He deliberately wore no identification. He gave no advance warning that he would disrupt her briefing. Instead, Padilla barged forward to the podium, shouting about the deportation of illegal aliens. Advertisement Immediately, Padilla got his media-moment wish — once Secret Service agents, who had no idea who he was, forcibly removed him. Alex Padilla unsuccessfully attempted to push past law enforcement to reach Noem's lectern. AP Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) recently attempted a pseudo-filibuster, speaking nonstop for 25 hours straight — not to delay legislation, but to fixate on President Donald Trump. Advertisement South Carolina Democratic state Rep. Julie von Haefen posted on social media an image of a bloody guillotine. It bore the title 'In these difficult times, some cuts may be necessary' and was juxtaposed with an image of a hanging, beheaded Trump, who, a year ago, was the target of two failed assassination attempts. The more Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and California Gov. Gavin Newsom scream at Trump for nationalizing the California Guard to stop LA's nightly violent anti-ICE protests, the more the two appear on the side of those who riot, destroy property and attack police. Yet who really wants to side with illegal aliens who spit on and burn American flags while waving Mexican flags? Former Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, along with other prominent Democrats, mocked the recent Washington, DC, military parade commemorating the 250th anniversary of the army, comparing it unfavorably with their own concurrent 'No Kings' anti-Trump protests. Advertisement Those demonstrations — subsidized by left-wing billionaire donors — were utterly incoherent. No other president has faced more lower federal court injunctions blocking executive orders than Trump. People march down Fifth Avenue at the No Kings protest against Trump on June 14, 2025 in New York. Zuma / Indeed, dozens of cherry-picked, left-wing district judges — the real unchecked 'kings' — now routinely block almost every one of Trump's executive orders. Advertisement Why are opposition Democrats not offering alternative agendas and compromises? Could they partner with Trump to allow green cards to illegal aliens who have no criminal records, have not been on public assistance, are now employed and have resided in the United States for over five years? Could Democrats meet with the president to express bipartisan support for democratic Israel in its existential war with theocratic Iran? Instead, why do Democrats throw two-year-old temper tantrums to howl nihilistically at everything Trump says and does? One, exasperated Democrats lack all levers of political power — the Congress, the White House and the Supreme Court. So, they take to the media and the streets. Two, Democrats are permanently frustrated that the more they scream and stomp, the more polls show radical declines in public support for their party. Three, their nemesis, 79-year-old Trump, seems impervious to Democratic lawfare, threats and smears. Advertisement Despite the hysterical attacks, he is still polling now about where prior presidents like George Bush and Barack Obama were at similar junctures in their second terms. The more Trump is smeared as a fascist or dictator, the more polls — like the latest liberal Economist/YouGov survey — show him gaining public support for securing the border and deportation. And the more the Left damns Trump as a racist, the more he wins unprecedented black and Hispanic support. Advertisement In recent Rasmussen tracking polls, Trump garnered 54% approval from black voters and 53% from Hispanics. Four, Trump proves a hard-to-hit, moving target for the frustrated left. He cannot quite be pigeonholed as a predictable right-wing bogeyman. Unlike the Left, when Trump weighs in on the Ukraine war, he first begins by deploring the tragic waste of over a million lives. No one is more pro-Israel. Yet he has offered a losing Iran a chance to negotiate its way out of total and humiliating defeat. Advertisement Trump talks nonstop about protecting the middle class. Unions like him; Wall Street mostly despises him. Trump wants to deport as many illegal alien criminals as possible. But he is willing to consider green cards for unlawful aliens who are working, crime-free and with long residence in the US. The Trump counterrevolution barrels ahead. The people cheer. And Democrats keep barking at the moon. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Pentagon says US doesn't want to pursue war with Iran after bombing 3 of its nuclear sites
WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Sunday that America 'does not seek war' with Iran in the aftermath of a surprise attack overnight on three of that country's nuclear sites. The mission, called 'Operation Midnight Hammer,' involved decoys and deception, and met with no Iranian resistance, Hegseth and Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a Pentagon news conference. 'This mission was not and has not been about regime change,' Hegseth added. Caine said the goal of the operation — destroying nuclear sites in Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan — had been achieved. 'Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction,' Caine said.
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Undocumented students push for right to education, but Alberta noncommittal
EDMONTON - Ariana Zapata's favourite subject in school is social studies. For the 13-year-old in Edmonton, this means lessons on historical societies, colonialism, how worldviews are developed and so on. The eighth grader's own worldview is still being built, but she has pillars in place: family, fight for what you believe in, don't be too trusting and, critically, education is a right. That's why, when Zapata gets home from school every day, she passes on what she learned to her three younger siblings. 'That way when they go back to school, they won't feel behind,' she said in a recent interview. School bells haven't applied to her brother and sisters in two years. They were kicked out of school when officials realized they were undocumented. Zapata is undocumented, too, but said her school hasn't figured that out yet. Alberta isn't unique in denying children without legal residency status from attending public school. Ontario is the only Canadian province or territory that legally requires schools to enrol undocumented children. Zapata and her family, along with a coalition of non-profit advocacy groups, want Alberta to follow in Ontario's footsteps. Samantha Vaux, a social worker with an Edmonton-based group that works with undocumented families, said that by not doing so, Alberta is not fulfilling commitments made by signing the United Nations Convention of the Child in 1999. Originally ratified in 1990, the convention states signatories 'shall' make 'primary education compulsory and available free to all.' 'It's not a privilege, it's a right,' said Vaux, with the Islamic Family and Social Services Association. 'The more those children are kept out of school, the more harmful it is not only to them, (but) to their family, the community, even our society.' There's no dependable estimate for how many undocumented people live in Canada. A briefing note prepared for former federal immigration minister Marc Miller last year said there could be as many as 500,000. Zapata's family came to Canada from Mexico a few years ago and applied for refugee status. All four Zapata children attended school for two years while the family's application was being processed. But when it was denied, so too was their right to attend publicly funded schools. The family decided it wasn't safe to return to Mexico and has stayed in Canada without documentation. Zapata said she feels the need to watch her back on the way to school, given the precariousness of her situation. Dayana Rodriguez knows that feeling, too. Rodriguez, 18, and her family came to Edmonton from Mexico in 2019 and applied for refugee status. Like the Zapatas, Rodriguez and her family were denied, but decided to stay. She attended school until 2022, but stopped after losing her residency status. 'We didn't even get out of the house,' she said of her time out of school. 'You are in your house, four walls. We couldn't even go to the park comfortably. 'It was like being in a jail.' When the Rodriguez family applied again, she returned to school, though she has recently dropped out to start working and support the family, including her two younger siblings. Rodriguez's five-year-old sister was born in Canada, so she might not face enrolment issues when the next school year comes around — but her teen brother might. 'They were also asking for his papers,' Rodriguez said. 'We had to talk to the school and they kind of let him (stay) for a little, but we don't know what's going to happen.' Vaux, who works with an undocumented family from Pakistan with four school-aged kids — all of whom can't enrol — said education is just one aspect of life that's barred to undocumented people in Canada. Public health care isn't an option, nor are jobs protected by labour laws. In May, after Vaux and other advocacy groups spoke at months of meetings, Edmonton Public School trustees voted to ask the province to change the laws to allow undocumented kids to go to school. Education Minister Demetrios Nicolaides hasn't directly answered questions about whether he'd considered making legislative changes, saying only that Alberta strives to 'strike a balance between responsibility to taxpayers and compassion for those arriving to the province.' Since the school board vote, his office denied multiple interview requests over a two-week period. It also didn't answer questions about whether Nicolaides agreed that Alberta isn't living up to its commitment to compulsory education. 'It's important to note that most foreign children are eligible for a funded education in the province,' Nicolaides said in a statement. Vaux said the lack of a clear answer was 'unacceptable.' 'It's literally red tape,' she said. 'Why are children's education stopped because of that?' She said children didn't make the decision to live without documentation, but are being punished as if they did. 'Children shouldn't have to suffer or deal with these adult issues,' Vaux said. 'They didn't ask to be put in those situations.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 22, 2025. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
