What has been said
Credible sources now say that UAP and non-human intelligence are real
In July 2023 a former intelligence officer who had served on the Defense Department’s UAP task force told a House subcommittee under oath that he had been informed, in the course of his official duties, of “a multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering program.” In November 2024 a former Defense Department official told a joint hearing of two House Oversight subcommittees, also under oath, “UAP are real,” and that the United States possesses UAP technologies.
Congress has acted on what it has heard. It has enacted statutes that require UAP reporting and protect people who disclose UAP information, and it has created a UAP records collection at the National Archives. Senators Schumer and Rounds have proposed a UAP Disclosure Act that addresses “technologies of unknown origin” and “biological evidence of non-human intelligence,” and the House has passed a version that would direct the government to take recovered technologies of unknown origin by eminent domain.
Executive-branch officials have told Congress that they know of no such programs. This site leaves that dispute to Congress and the courts and works from the premise that the reports are true, asking what the law would then require. About the premise →
The legal questions
If the reports are true, the law faces questions it has never had to answer
The site takes up each of them separately. Among them:
- Recovered craft. Who owns a craft or material recovered by the government or a contractor, and what compensation is due if the government takes it?
- Secrecy. How far can the state secrets privilege keep these questions out of court, and when must the government explain itself?
- Whistleblowers. What protects a person who reports a hidden program to Congress or an inspector general?
- Legal status. Is an intelligent non-human being a “person” with rights, and can it seek habeas corpus if it is held against its will?
- Technology. Who may patent an invention derived from non-human material, when only a human can be named as an inventor?
- Contact. Can a private group lawfully create a protected place for humans and non-human intelligence to meet, without being treated as conducting diplomacy?
The gaps in the law
Existing law was written without this in mind, and the new law is unfinished
Statutes speak of “persons,” “aircraft,” “property” and “foreign governments” without contemplating non-human intelligence. Courts have refused habeas corpus to animals but have never considered a being that can reason and make agreements. The UAP statutes Congress has passed govern reporting and records; none of them settles the legal status of non-human beings or the ownership of recovered material, and none limits the use of force against craft.
Each analysis therefore asks how the subject fits within existing law, where that law would have to be stretched, and where it needs to change. Many end with a model statute that legislators can adapt, including a truth and reconciliation commission, interim protection for non-human intelligence in government custody, rules for patents on NHI-derived technology, and peaceful contact zones.
The invitation
These questions need lawyers, legislators and scholars working on them together
When this site began, no law firm, clinic or legal resource center was devoted to these questions, and courts and legislatures have barely begun to answer them. The analyses and drafts on this site are a starting point. They will become reliable only when practitioners test the arguments, challenge the conclusions, bring new authority and draft better language.
If you are a lawyer, a legislator or a member of legislative staff, a judge, or a legal scholar, we ask you to join. Members discuss each question with others who work on it, propose corrections and additions, and help turn the drafts into documents a court or a legislature could use. Every accepted contribution goes into the next dated version of the work.
You need not accept the premise to take part. Careful skeptics are welcome, because they make the analyses stronger.
Not ready to join? Start here for a short guide to the material. The site is published by the Emergent Frontiers Institute as legal information and a forum for practitioners; it does not provide legal services.
Join NHI Law
Join the discussion
Tell us about your legal background and the questions you would like to work on. We usually review requests within a day or two, then email you a link to set a password.