California AB 2113 Is Signed and Chaptered. That Does Not Settle Federal Preemption.

The Brief

On 20 September 2026 Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 2113; it was filed with the Secretary of State the same day and chaptered as Chapter 383, Statutes of 2026. The Legislature had passed the measure on 27 August 2026 in a unanimous 76–0 concurrence vote. The chaptered law makes it a state infraction, punishable by a $500 fine, to operate an unauthorized unmanned aircraft within 400 feet of an outdoor ticketed entertainment event or amusement park, with specified exemptions. The chaptered text does not state an operative or effective date. Federal preemption questions remain open; this article does not treat the statute as settled against 49 U.S.C. § 40103, and state enforcement authority is not FAA permission or approval.

If you fly commercial drone jobs in California, a familiar regulatory conflict is about to land on the flight line.

Assembly Bill 2113, introduced by Assemblymember Tina McKinnor and championed by major entertainment conglomerates, targets the growing issue of rogue drone incursions over outdoor concerts, music festivals, and packed sports stadiums.

Under current federal rules, the FAA maintains permanent flight restrictions over Major League Baseball, NFL, NCAA football, and major motor speedway events with seating capacities of 30,000 or more (14 CFR § 99.7). But for mid-sized outdoor concert amphitheaters, local county fairs, or private music venues holding 1,500 to 10,000 fans, securing a federal Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) is rarely approved by the FAA.

California’s bill attempts to close that gap from Sacramento:

• The Restriction: Makes it unlawful to operate an unmanned aircraft within 400 feet of an outdoor ticketed entertainment event or amusement park (§ 21752(a)).
• The Threshold: For ticketed entertainment events, the venue must hold 1,000 or more attendees, have gated entries or barriers, and the event must not already be covered by FAA restrictions (§ 21750(b)). Amusement parks are covered under a separate definition with no 1,000-attendee threshold (§ 21750(a)).
• The Penalty: A state infraction carrying a $500 fine.
• The Exemptions: Does not apply when the operator has venue-operator consent or is a venue/amusement-park employee on official business; when the operator is a specified utility or transportation-agency employee on official business; or when the operator holds an FAA certificate, waiver, or authorization, is flying commercially, is authorized for commercial beyond-visual-line-of-sight operations, and complies with that authorization and federal rules (§ 21752(b)). Public-agency emergency personnel using unmanned aircraft in fire, law-enforcement, or emergency-response duties are not barred by this section (§ 21752(d)). State authority is not FAA permission.

The Preemption Dilemma for Working Pilots

For Part 107 pilots, the immediate concern is not unauthorized concert filming—it is the erosion of consistent airspace rules.

Federal statute gives the United States Government exclusive sovereignty of airspace of the United States (49 U.S.C. § 40103); how far down that reaches for drones is contested. Historically, federal courts have struck down municipal and state ordinances that attempt to regulate navigable airspace altitude, flight paths, or drone operations, ruling them preempted by federal law (most notably Singer v. City of Newton).

Now that AB 2113 is signed into law:

1. Local Police Enforcement: Local law enforcement officers—who generally cannot cite FAA regulations—gain direct state statutory authority to issue $500 tickets to drone pilots operating near event boundaries.
2. Conflicting Boundaries: A pilot could be flying in full compliance with FAA Part 107, including any required airspace authorization, yet still face a state infraction citation for operating within 400 feet of an outdoor ticketed entertainment event or amusement park, unless a § 21752(b) exemption applies.
3. Legal Challenge Looming: Aviation legal experts anticipate federal court challenges on preemption grounds, forcing judges to decide once again whether state police power stops at the property line or extends 400 feet into the sky. Federal preemption remains an open question.

Sources

• • California State Legislature: Assembly Bill No. 2113: Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Ticketed Entertainment Venues — https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB2113
• • United States Code: 49 U.S.C. § 40103, Sovereignty and Use of Airspace — https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCODE-2011-title49/USCODE-2011-title49-subtitleVII-partA-subparti-chap401-sec40103
• • Federal Aviation Administration: Advisory Circular 91-92, Pilot’s Guide to a Preflight Briefing — https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.information/documentID/1036892

The Drone Pilot Brief does not accept payment for editorial coverage.

Correction, 28 Sep 2026: An earlier version of this article said AB 2113 was awaiting the Governor’s decision with a 30 Sep 2026 deadline. Governor Newsom signed the bill on 20 Sep 2026, and it was chaptered as Chapter 383, Statutes of 2026. We have updated the headline, summary, Flight Card, related status language, and the Restriction / Threshold / Exemptions statute summaries and the Conflicting Boundaries example to match the chaptered text (Pub. Util. Code §§ 21750, 21752). The chaptered text does not state an operative date; federal preemption questions remain open.