Drones Over Prisons Surge as Courts Limit Countermeasures

Drones detected over U.S. prisons have surged to levels never seen before, with federal officials reporting 479 drone incidents at federal facilities in 2024—colossal growth from 23 incidents in 2018. The rise coincides with advances in drone detection and interception technologies, but it also reflects the evolving methods of smugglers who now deploy faster, heavier drones to drop contraband over security perimeters. At the same time, state facilities operate under regulatory limits that prevent shooting down or jamming drones, leaving authorities with detection and confiscation as the primary tools.

Joel Anderson, director of South Carolina's Department of Corrections, said his agency has positioned itself as a national leader in drone-detection systems for medium- and maximum-security prisons. "We get assaulted nightly," Anderson said. "We get assaulted at multiple institutions at night." South Carolina logged 262 drone incursions over its prisons in 2022, up from 69 in 2019. When a drone incursion is detected, a drone-response team is dispatched to the location of the payload drop. Within minutes, the drone is typically out of sight unless it crashes or investigators trace it back to its controller.

Anderson has observed smuggling missions becoming more elaborate in recent years. In earlier days, smugglers used drones that carried roughly four pounds and reached about 45 miles per hour. Today, the trend leans toward heavy-lift drones capable of speeds over 75 mph and payloads weighing around 25-pound duffel bags, flown over fences in rapid succession. At some institutions, there may be back-to-back drops in a single night, with operators returning to a central controller and then resuming the mission. Anderson noted that many drone pilots are former inmates who maintain connections with accomplices outside the prison and obtain illegal cellphones to coordinate drops. Payloads are often camouflaged to blend with surroundings, increasing the challenge of visual detection from a distance.

South Carolina’s approach centers on early detection and rapid response. The state has deployed a system that alerts specific prison staff when a drone is over a facility. A dedicated drone team then moves to the drop site, and the drone's flight record is reviewed afterward to gather data about the drone’s previous flights, routes, and images captured during the incursion. The team has reported confiscating drones in nets or at fences and recovering drones that have crashed on yards, with some devices whose batteries expire mid-flight. The data collected can help investigators trace the drone back to its operator’s address and make an arrest. In one case cited by Anderson, investigators followed a drone that photographed a suspect’s mailbox, leading to an undercover operation.

The evolving threat extends beyond sheer speed and payload. Drones are often used to deliver contraband such as drugs, including fentanyl, as well as food items and other goods, into prison yards. Anderson said that the failure to block illicit communications inside facilities contributes to the problem: many inmates use illegal cellphones to coordinate with outside couriers who pilot the drones. He noted that authorities grabbed a large quantity of fentanyl in a single incident—"four hundred and sixty-four grams of fentanyl in one bag with one drone"—illustrating how deadly these drops can be if left unchecked. The Federal Aviation Administration prohibits states from downing drones because they are registered aircraft, which complicates efforts to neutralize threats before they reach prisoners. Consequently, state prisons rely on detection, confiscation, and investigation rather than engagement in the air.

The Federal Communications Commission is weighing options to allow states to employ radio-jamming technology to block inmates from contacting people outside the prison walls, a move supporters say could reduce the incentive to smuggle in drones. Anderson expressed cautious optimism about new tools, but stressed that staff are currently most effective when focused on security inside living areas rather than chasing airborne packages. "I applaud our staff for being as steadfast as they are. They're good at what they do," he said. "I'd much rather be using them in the living areas, watching inmates, than running around out here chasing illegal packages, because a lot of it is caused by these illegal cell phones that we have that give them direct communication with their counterparts outside the fences." The FAA’s stance remains a constraint, as drones are treated as legitimate aircraft, complicating efforts to disrupt drops in real time.

The pattern observed in South Carolina and mirrored elsewhere suggests that drone-smuggling networks are adapting to security enhancements by shifting toward more capable drones and more aggressive tactics. As the number of incidents rises at federal facilities, regulators and state agencies are under increasing pressure to develop countermeasures that are both effective and compliant with aviation and communications law. The central tension remains: how to stop airborne drops without risking safety or legal exposure during interceptions, while also curbing the illicit use of cellphones that connect drones to outside operators.

The broader implications touch on technology and artificial intelligence in law enforcement. Drones, sensors, nets, and data-recording tools form a growing ecosystem of capability that prisons are deploying to detect and document incursions. Analysts say the next phase may involve more sophisticated geofencing, improved crowding of detection alerts, and tighter integration of drone-data analytics with inmate-management systems. As policymakers consider FCC and FAA policies, the balance between security, safety, and civil liberties will shape how states defend facilities in an era of rapid drone innovation. In the meantime, facilities like South Carolina’s continue to refine their detection networks and response protocols, aiming to shorten the window between detection and takedown while gathering actionable intelligence that could lead to prosecutions of drone operators.