U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) plans to equip its officers with electrically charged gloves designed to deliver controlled shocks to individuals, with deployment expected as early as March. The Department of Homeland Security has authorized the purchase of thousands of these devices, formally known as Generated Low Output Voltage Emitters (G.L.O.V.E.), at an estimated cost of up to $20 million.
These gloves, which resemble conventional work gloves, incorporate a built-in electrical system that activates when an officer presses a switch. The device must make contact with a person’s bare skin to administer a brief electric shock intended to gain compliance rapidly. According to Compliant Technologies, the manufacturer of G.L.O.V.E., the stimulation typically provokes compliance within three seconds without causing burns, marks, or lasting injury.
John Peters, president of the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths and a researcher familiar with the technology, described the sensation as similar to a “bee sting.” He noted that the effect is immediate and sharply distracting, making it an effective tool for officers encountering resistance during encounters.
The gloves have been used for several years in some U.S. jails and by law enforcement agencies, and ICE’s adoption marks a significant expansion of their deployment within federal immigration enforcement operations.
The announcement has drawn criticism from civil rights organizations concerned about the potential for excessive use of force. Critics point to previous controversies surrounding ICE’s enforcement methods, particularly under the Trump administration’s immigration policies, which faced scrutiny for fatal encounters. Jenn Rolnick Borchetta of the American Civil Liberties Union stated that ICE has demonstrated a propensity for deploying force too quickly in the past year, underscoring opposition to introducing new compliance tools that deliver pain stimuli.
ICE officials have emphasized that the gloves are intended to provide officers with an alternative means to control situations with less risk of serious injury compared to other use-of-force options. However, debate continues over the appropriateness and potential risks associated with the technology in immigration enforcement settings.