Originally Posted by
joshs
That's how SCOTUS has looked at it in the past:
"We have said that the airspace is a public highway. Yet it is obvious that if the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the land, he must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere. Otherwise buildings could not be erected, trees could not be planted, and even fences could not be run. The principle is recognized when the law gives a remedy in case overhanging structures are erected on adjoining land. The landowner owns at least as much of the space above the ground as the can occupy or use in connection with the land." United States v. Causby, 328 U.S. 256, 264 (1946).
People often cite Causby as creating a bright line rule of at least 83 feet above the surface, but I'm not totally sure that's an accurate reading of the case. The Court actually applied a multi-factor test to determine if the air travel interfered with the owner's usage and enjoyment of the land.