North Carolina Department of Adult Correction Secretary Leslie Dismukes confirmed in August 2026 that drones carrying contraband into the state's correctional facilities are on the rise. The department is not waiting passively. State corrections officials are actively collaborating with the Federal Aviation Administration to write new rules that would give law enforcement the authority to physically disable drones that breach prison airspace — authority that, as of now, simply does not exist under federal law.
The Legal Gap That Grounds Every Response
Congress designated North Carolina correctional facilities as no-fly zones under the Safer Skies Act. On paper, that sounds protective. In practice, it changes almost nothing at the perimeter. Under current FAA regulations, law enforcement agencies — state corrections officers and county sheriff's deputies alike — have no legal authority to shoot down, jam, or otherwise disable an airborne drone, even one that is actively penetrating a prison's restricted airspace, the department said.
When a drone is detected crossing a prison perimeter, officers are left with a single active option: locate the ground operator and make an arrest. Those operators are frequently stationed miles away from the facility. By the time deputies identify and reach the launch point, the delivery may already be complete. Secretary Dismukes called active drone mitigation authority essential to protecting prison security perimeters and statewide critical infrastructure. The current statutory restrictions continue to bar state and local personnel from any kinetic or electronic disruption of an airborne drone, leaving ground interdiction as the primary — and often ineffective — countermeasure.
Cologne County Sheriff Bill Rogers put it plainly: local deputies need clear FAA mitigation regulations that specifically permit law enforcement to disable intruding drones. Without that regulatory framework, the no-fly designation means deputies can only watch and chase.
Columbus County: A Case Study in How These Plots Work
In July 2026, Columbus County Sheriff's deputies intercepted a drone drug delivery operation after stopping a vehicle near a state correctional facility. The search of that vehicle turned up an unmanned aerial vehicle along with illicit narcotics that investigators determined were intended for a prison drop-off.
The case did not rest solely on physical evidence. Investigators reviewed recorded inmate telephone conversations that specifically coordinated the timing of drone flight arrivals, the department said. Those recordings substantiated the planned drop and gave investigators direct evidence linking the outside operators to inmates inside the facility. The Columbus County case illustrates the operational sophistication these plots can reach: inside coordination, outside logistics, and a vehicle positioned for rapid deployment — all aimed at exploiting the window in which corrections staff can see a drone but cannot legally stop it.
What the Department Is Asking For
The Department of Adult Correction has been direct about what closing this gap will require. Statutory and administrative authority to mitigate drones must be paired with dedicated federal and state funding for anti-drone safety tools, the department affirmed. Authority alone is not enough. Corrections leadership indicated that countering aerial contraband plots will require ongoing capital investment in counter-UAS detection hardware and expanded correctional staffing.
Detection hardware is one layer. Staffing is another. Responding to a drone incursion — tracking the device, identifying launch coordinates, dispatching personnel to intercept the ground operator — takes bodies. Without additional staff, facilities are stretched between their existing security responsibilities and the demands of a live drone response. The department has made clear that federal and state funding streams must support both the technology and the personnel side of any effective counter-drone program.
A Nationwide Problem Requiring Interagency Coordination
Secretary Dismukes framed the drone contraband problem as one that reaches well beyond North Carolina's borders. Prison drone incursions represent a nationwide challenge, she said, one that requires interagency coordination spanning state corrections departments, local sheriff's offices, and federal aviation regulators. The collaboration currently underway between the North Carolina Department of Adult Correction and the FAA is aimed directly at that coordination gap.
The push for new rules puts North Carolina at the center of a regulatory question that corrections administrators across the country are watching. If the FAA formalizes mitigation authority for correctional airspace, it would mark a significant shift in how federal aviation law interacts with corrections security. Sheriff Rogers and Secretary Dismukes have both made explicit that the current framework — designated no-fly zone, no interdiction authority — is not workable. The rules being developed with the FAA are intended to replace that framework with one that gives officers an actual tool for the moment a drone crosses the fence line, not just after it lands.
