Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s plan to equip officers with gloves capable of delivering painful electric shocks has drawn sharp criticism from Democratic officials and civil rights advocates. The devices, known as the G.L.O.V.E., or Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter, would allow agents to activate a shock function directly against a person’s skin to gain compliance during arrests. ICE intends to spend between $10 million and $20 million to outfit most or all of its workforce with these “conductive distraction and de-escalation devices.”
The Mechanics and Opposition
The gloves function as standard patrol gear until an officer presses a button to engage the electrical mode. While marketed as nonlethal and safe for the heart, the technology has a controversial history in law enforcement. Unlike Tasers, these gloves do not typically leave burn marks or visible contact injuries, which raises concerns about hidden abuse during arrests.
New York Attorney General Letitia James publicly condemned the plan during a Wednesday news conference. She warned that officers who misuse the equipment in her state would face criminal and civil consequences. Democratic lawmakers, including Representatives Pramila Jayapal, Maxwell Frost, and Delia Ramirez, echoed similar sentiments on social media platforms.
Jayapal wrote on X that this equipment would not make anyone safer and instead provides another dangerous tool to target citizens and immigrants alike. The Department of Homeland Security, ICE’s parent agency, issued a statement emphasizing the need to ensure officers have tools necessary for safety. The statement did not mention the specific product or explain why it had been chosen. A spokesperson for the parent agency noted that every decision is made with “careful consideration” to ensure technology aligns with law enforcement policies and standards.
Risks and Past Incidents
The plan to equip federal agents with these gloves has sparked concern due to past misuse by local departments. The devices have been used more frequently in jails than on the street, yet incidents of excessive force have occurred in both settings. A pending lawsuit alleges a 43-year-old man died in 2024 after being shocked 27 times with the gloves and 13 times by a Taser at a jail in Richmond, Kentucky.
Related: Christmas Shopping: Knowing Your Rights When Shopping Online
An internal investigation by the Madison County Detention Center found that two of the glove shocks lasted 45 and 99 seconds respectively. This far exceeds the manufacturer’s recommended limit of 15 seconds. The investigation concluded that the actions “inflicted unnecessary pain” and “heightened the risk of serious health complications.”
Other lawsuits alleging injuries from the gloves have been filed and subsequently dismissed. One case involved a man with heart problems shocked at a Las Vegas trade show, while another defendant claimed he was laughed at after being shocked in court. Despite these past issues, ICE appears set to proceed with the purchase.
While the manufacturer warns the devices should not be used against vulnerable populations like the elderly, small children, pregnant women, and the severely handicapped, civil rights experts worry the equipment will be misused against those same groups. It is a familiar pattern in law enforcement technology; the maker of Taser recently phased out its drive-stun feature, a similar pain compliance tool, after it was misused by some officers. When a tool designed for pain is always within arm’s reach, agents may default to using it rather than de-escalating the situation.
The solicitation for the no-bid contract was published in a DHS database, with officials indicating the deal could be released as early as Friday. The contract is set to last through March 31, 2027. The founder of Compliant Technologies LLC, the manufacturer, declined to comment on the ICE solicitation.
Public officials have questioned the safety of the new gear, especially in light of previous incidents. Critics argue that tools intended for crowd control can easily escalate into abuse against civilians. The debate over how to handle border security without resorting to excessive force remains a complex issue for policymakers.