If you ask the question "should the FAA be able to regulate flying a drone at or below tree top level on private property" my guess is 99% of the population would say absolutely not. The argument I've heard for giving the FAA that authority is the possibility of a fly away. In my mind that argument, which centers around mitigating risk, is total nonsense. While I think RID has a place, the airspace under 100 or 200 feet above private property should not be regulated by federal, state or local government as far as recreational flying is concerned.
Right. The FAA told the DC Court of Appeal that the risk of a fly away is
the justification for remote ID. And the FAA's Exhibit 1 in support of the argument was the "fly away" Phantom that crashed into a tree on the White House in 2015. If you do not know the details here are a few excerpted from a New York Times article but there are many all over the internet. The important facts to know are:
1. The pilot worked for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and had top secret clearance;
2. The pilot was admittedly drunk and flying at 3:00 am;
3. The pilot knew the drone flew away but just went to bed and fell asleep;
4. The Secret Service described the incident as nothing but a little "drunken misadventure;"
5. The federal government protected the pilot's identity who was not charged with a crime.
In case you are wondering about the NGA, it says that it “delivers world-class geospatial intelligence that provides a decisive advantage to policymakers, military service members, intelligence professionals and first responders. Anyone who sails a U.S. ship, flies a U.S. aircraft, makes national policy decisions, fights wars, locates targets, responds to natural disasters, or even navigates with a cellphone relies on NGA.”
That is right. The drone crime of the century according to the FAA was perpetrated by a drunk federal agent with a security clearance who was not charged with a crime.
White House Drone Crash Described as a U.S. Worker’s Drunken Lark
New York Times Article--Excerpts
By Michael D. Shear and Michael S. Schmidt
Jan. 27, 2015
WASHINGTON — It was 42 degrees and raining lightly around 3 a.m. on Monday when an inebriated off-duty employee for a government intelligence agency decided it was a good time to fly his friend’s drone, a 2-foot-by-2-foot “quadcopter” that sells for hundreds of dollars and is popular among hobbyists.
But officials say the plan was foiled, perhaps by wind or a tree, when the employee — who has not been named by the Secret Service or charged with a crime — lost control of the drone as he operated it from an apartment just blocks from the White House.
He texted his friends, worried that the drone had gone down on the White House grounds, and then went to sleep. It was not until the next morning, when he woke and learned from friends that a drone had been found at the White House, that he contacted his employer, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. He then called the Secret Service and immediately began cooperating with an investigation into the incident.
He told the Secret Service that he was using the drone recreationally and didn't mean to fly it over the White House, said a U.S. official speaking on condition of anonymity.
In the process of what officials describe as nothing more than a drunken misadventure, the employee managed to highlight another vulnerability in the protective shield that the Secret Service erects around the White House complex.
The man, who was at an apartment near the White House when he lost control of the drone, went to bed before reporting the episode, according to law enforcement officials.
www.nytimes.com
BUT DO NOT WORRY :
Officials said at the time the device posed no threat.
*BTW The Secret Service came under scrutiny around the same time (2015) for its incredibly lax White House security. An
independent review concluded that it needs to build a better fence and hire more officers. 
.
