Drone Operators Challenge University of Michigan’s Sweeping Aircraft Ban in Landmark Case

A critical Legal battle over drone access to airspace is unfolding in Michigan, where operators are challenging the University of Michigan’s broad prohibition of unmanned aircraft over its properties. The case, heard Tuesday in the Michigan Court of Claims, could set a significant precedent for drone operators’ rights across the state via The Detroit News.

The Michigan Coalition of Drone Operators filed suit against the University Regents and Public Safety Director Eddie Washington Jr. in June, arguing that the university’s comprehensive drone ban exceeds its authority under state and federal law. The university’s current policy prohibits drone operations, takeoffs, landings, and overflights across all university-owned or controlled property, with limited exceptions for law enforcement and approved indoor operations.

Attorney Dean Greenblatt, representing the drone operators, characterized the university as an “800-pound gorilla” whose stance could make this case particularly significant for establishing operator rights. The challenge gained momentum after university Police threatened enforcement action against drone operator Kara Murphy, who had planned a December 2023 “fly-in” event near campus.

The university’s position, presented by Associate General Counsel Thomas Kent, framed the restrictions as a matter of “life and death,” citing instances where drones allegedly interfered with emergency helicopter operations at the University of Michigan Medical Center. However, Court of Appeals Judge Brock Swartzle pressed Kent on the inconsistent application of the policy across university properties, including satellite facilities in Lansing and Detroit.

A central point of contention is the university’s authority to regulate airspace. The drone operators’ legal team, including attorney Tom Lambert, maintains that such regulation falls exclusively under federal and state jurisdiction. The university counters that its constitutional autonomy grants it broad regulatory powers over campus activities.

The dispute highlights broader tensions between drone operators’ rights and institutional control over airspace, particularly as unmanned aircraft technology becomes more prevalent in both recreational and commercial applications. The case’s timing coincides with heightened scrutiny of drone activity across the country, including recent concerns raised by Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard, who has urged Congress to strengthen drone regulations.

Judge Swartzle has ordered both parties to submit supplemental briefs by January 17 clarifying their positions on the university’s regulatory authority and the precise definition of university property. The outcome could significantly impact how educational institutions and other large property owners can restrict drone operations in their airspace.

The case originated from an incident in November 2023, when Murphy was instructed by campus police to cease drone operations over university grounds, despite operating from adjacent property. “I was completely within my right. My feet were planted outside of University of Michigan property,” Murphy stated, noting she maintained visual line of sight throughout the flight and operated when no temporary flight restrictions were in place.

Photo courtesy of University of Michigan/Instagram.