House Rejects Aviation Safety Bill After Pentagon Flags Concerns

The United States House of Representatives rejected a comprehensive aviation safety bill on Monday, February 24, 2026. Its main goal was to introduce reforms in response to a fatal air crash that occurred in November 2025 near Washington's Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA). The bill failed primarily due to the firm opposition of the Department of Defense, which deemed some of the proposed regulations too burdensome for military operations. The Pentagon argued that new requirements for integrating and tracking Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and manned military aircraft in civilian airspace would infringe on its operational autonomy and strain its budget. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, U.S. aviation law has undergone numerous amendments aimed at increasing security. In 2018, the FAA Reauthorization Act was passed, which, among other things, imposed new duties on the Federal Aviation Administration regarding the integration of drones into airspace. The November 2025 crash reignited the debate about the boundaries between safety requirements and military needs. The House vote revealed a serious rift within the Republican Party. Some of its members, guided by loyalty to the presidential administration and the arguments of the armed forces, supported the motion to reject the bill. They were opposed by other Republicans, Democratic Party allies, and the powerful lobby of victims' families. „Unfortunately, in its current form this bill poses serious problems for our military and their ability to defend the nation.” — Representative Sam Graves The bill's rejection is a severe blow to the Republican chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, who had worked for months on a compromise text, hoping for its swift passage. The families of the crash victims, who had been conducting an intense campaign on Capitol Hill for months, expressed deep disappointment and anger. They considered the bill a necessary, albeit belated, step to ensure the tragedy from a few months ago would not be repeated. The military's influence on the legislative process regarding national security is traditionally strong, but in this case, commentators assessed it as a direct blocking of civilian control over a shared airspace. Without the adoption of new regulations, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and civilian aviation authorities remain with limited tools to oversee all traffic in the national airspace. The future of similar reforms is now uncertain, and any new legislative attempts will require overcoming strong resistance from the defense establishment.