Can this ultimately affect drones that fly over another person's property simply based on principle?

[LoudThunder]

Four hunters passing from one piece of public land into another area of public land stepped over private land, did not touch it, merely passed over it and the owner (Fred Eshelman, a pharmaceutical executive) sued the hunters for trespassing since they entered his "airspace"

Federal appeals court sides with corner-crossing hunters in Wyoming dispute

The landowner lost, but now the case of Corner Crossing is scheduled to go to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, Eshelman filed a civil lawsuit against the hunters, claiming trespass by passing through the "airspace" above his property and seeking over $7 million in damages.

 

[Brutalwarpig]

From my understanding, in the US, you do not own the airspace above your land above a certain height. A landowners owns the airspace directly above their land to the extent of their use. In other words if you want to build a tall building on your land, you can up to a statutory regulated height. The law generally states a land owner has a right to their airspace to the extent that they can enjoy their land free from unreasonable intrusion or annoyance. Certainly 500 feet above ground level is considered public right of way. However the space drones may fly in is no higher than 400 feet AGL. The FAA is the sole authority over US airspace above 500 feet AGL. However, I do not know how the conservative majority in the Supreme Court will view this issue. They can only interpret the law. The justice can't legislate from the bench. This will be interesting.