Controversial Contract for Electric Shock Gloves

Senator Catherine Cortez Masto and several of her Democratic peers are challenging a contract awarded by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The $16.7 million deal involves purchasing 6,000 electric shock gloves. These gloves are intended for use on detainees and protesters.
Opposition from civil rights advocates and Democrats arises from concerns about misuse. They argue ICE officers may not use the gloves responsibly. The contract with Compliant Technologies LLC, a company in Kentucky, did not involve competitive bidding. It covers gloves and support equipment for six months.

Civil rights critics highlight a lack of oversight in ICE’s use of force. Their concerns are amplified by the existing immigration enforcement environment. Senators, led by Cortez Masto, sent a letter urging ICE to cancel the glove purchase. They cited misuse of force in various U.S. cities as a basis for skepticism toward ICE’s professionalism in deploying new tools.

The gloves function as regular patrol gloves but can be electrified with a button press. Direct skin contact is necessary to deliver a pain-inducing shock. This shock is promoted as a method to ensure compliance. Local jails and police departments have adopted similar devices.

ICE plans to use these gloves in highly stressful situations. These include arrests, escorting combative detainees, and managing disturbances near detention centers. The gloves aim to prevent injury and assert control quickly. They could also deter aggression and escape attempts. Additionally, their use intends to avoid more severe force options like firearms. ICE claims the gloves will follow policy and training standards, though specifics are unclear.

Senators emphasize the need for transparency in training and oversight to prevent glove misuse. They call for detailed public disclosure of how officers will be prepared for and evaluated on glove usage.

The Department of Homeland Security responded to critics, accusing ‘sanctuary politicians’ of compromising officers’ safety by opposing law enforcement equipment.