The California Supreme Courtroom has declined to take up Castañares v. Superior Courtroom, successfully sustaining the Fourth District Courtroom of Enchantment’s 2023 ruling that requires police departments to evaluate drone footage on a case-by-case foundation underneath the California Public Information Act (CPRA) moderately than issuing blanket denials.
Case Background & Authorized Framework
Initiated in 2021 by journalist Arturo Castañares of La Prensa San Diego, the request sought all drone footage from Chula Vista’s Drone-as-First-Responder (DFR) program for a month. The trial court docket initially upheld the town’s denial, citing investigatory exemptions and the “catch-all” clause to keep away from an “unreasonable burden”.
In December 2023, the appellate court docket reversed that broad denial, categorizing footage into three varieties:
-
Clearly a part of investigatory recordsdata — exempt.
-
Footage utilized in investigations however not but a part of a file — probably exempt.
-
Factual inquiry footage (e.g., water leaks or non-criminal calls) — not exempt.
The case was despatched again for additional proceedings requiring detailed evaluation.
Following the appellate ruling, the California Supreme Courtroom declined to evaluation the case in April 2024, permitting the choice to face as precedent.
Metropolis’s Place & Sensible Considerations
Chula Vista officers have persistently expressed concern that the ruling may threaten the viability of the DFR program. In an August 2025 assertion, the town estimated that manually reviewing and redacting only one month’s footage would require 229 full workdays—practically a 12 months of labor by one full-time worker—to make sure privateness and compliance.
Town’s assertion emphasised that their resistance just isn’t motivated by secrecy however by a must protect a essential public security software whereas safeguarding resident privateness. The DFR program, they word, is used solely in emergency response—not for routine surveillance—and already maintains transparency by way of printed flight information, public excursions, and clearly outlined insurance policies.
Implications for DFR Packages
-
Administrative Burden: The requirement for thorough redaction and classification may impose important prices and gradual the deployment of drone models throughout emergencies.
-
Program Viability: Departments might must weigh the advantages of real-time aerial intelligence towards the assets required for compliant data administration.
-
Precedent Setting: As one of many earliest and most sturdy DFR initiatives within the U.S., Chula Vista’s expertise might sign how different businesses construction and doc their drone applications transferring ahead.
With the appellate framework now in place, legislation enforcement businesses might more and more reassess how they handle drone information—prioritizing techniques that may shortly classify footage, apply redactions, or launch non-sensitive content material proactively. The case underscores the strain between rising aerial applied sciences and current public data legal guidelines—a steadiness that can possible form coverage as drone utilization expands in public security.
Learn extra:
Miriam McNabb is the Editor-in-Chief of DRONELIFE and CEO of JobForDrones, an expert drone providers market, and a fascinated observer of the rising drone business and the regulatory setting for drones. Miriam has penned over 3,000 articles centered on the business drone house and is a global speaker and acknowledged determine within the business. Miriam has a level from the College of Chicago and over 20 years of expertise in excessive tech gross sales and advertising and marketing for brand new applied sciences.
For drone business consulting or writing, E mail Miriam.
TWITTER:@spaldingbarker
Subscribe to DroneLife right here.
