Padilla, Schiff, Cortez Masto Urge Trump Administration to Abandon Reckless Plan to Equip ICE with Electric Shock Gloves

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff (both-D-Calif) joined Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and 13 other Senate colleagues in calling on the Trump Administration to abandon its reckless plan to outfit U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers with gloves that deliver painful electric shocks. Their letter also demanded that if ICE proceeds with this purchase, it must first provide Congress with answers and documentation to over 30 questions about how these devices will be used, the protocol for using them, safety guardrails, and accountability measures.

On August 10, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a notice concerning ICE's planned acquisition of the CTG-5 G.L.O.V.E., a glove designed to deliver a painful electric shock. The notice estimates the potential value of the acquisition between $10 million and $20 million. Despite opposition, on August 27, ICE moved forward with a $16.7 million no-bid contract for these gloves without providing Congress responses to questions.

"We write to express deep concern about U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) plans to spend up to $20 million on gloves that deliver electric shocks," wrote the Senators. "…The blatant and tragic misuse of force in Los Angeles, Chicago, Minneapolis, Houston, Maine, and other locations around the country raises significant skepticism about the agency's professional capability to safely deploy a new tool that could be used to harm Americans without cause. Therefore, we urge ICE to cancel the contract and reconsider the purchase."

"The proposed acquisition raises serious questions about necessity, proportionality, medical safety, training, accountability, and constitutional rights," continued the Senators. "Those questions are particularly important given the significant public scrutiny surrounding ICE's excessive use of force. A device capable of delivering an electrical shock through direct contact with an individual presents substantial risks if deployed during civil arrests - even more so if it is deployed without clear limits, appropriate training, and comprehensive oversight."

"At a time when the American people have demanded de-escalation in immigration enforcement, it is not clear why existing tools and tactics are insufficient for the agency," wrote the Senators. "In the past year, DHS has repeatedly spent millions of taxpayer dollars on purchases it ends up not using, including $464 million for airplanes, $700 million on warehouses, and more than $2.25 million for SUVs wrapped with ICE branding. Many of these ICE transactions, including the planned electric-shock glove purchase, are completed through no-bid contracts that circumvent the normal competitive procurement process without a sufficient rationale."

"If ICE proceeds with purchasing $20 million worth of electric-shock gloves, Congress needs a clear understanding of the device's safety and authorized uses," the Senators concluded.

In addition to Padilla, Schiff, and Cortez Masto, the letter was signed by Senators Angus King (I-Maine), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.).

This week, Padilla, along with Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), called on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and ICE to immediately halt the planned purchase of electric shock gloves and demanded answers about the circumstances and questionable contracting process that led ICE to pursue the acquisition. Earlier this month, Padilla called out the Trump Administration's continued abuses of power through the carrying out of their violent mass deportation agenda and inhumane treatment of detained immigrants. In June, Padilla pressed Mullin and Venturella on the staggering death toll at ICE detention centers. Padilla also condemned Republicans' partisan bill to provide ICE and CBP with an extra $70 billion without necessary reforms and forced a vote on his amendment that would require ICE officers to wear body cameras while on duty.

The full text of the letter can be viewed here and below.

Dear Acting Director Venturella,

We write to express deep concern about U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) plans to spend up to $20 million on gloves that deliver electric shocks. Over the past year, ICE personnel have been involved in numerous well-documented incidents of excessive force and civil rights violations. These incidents have shown the American people that ICE personnel are not adequately trained or accountable for their interactions with civilians. The blatant and tragic misuse of force in Los Angeles, Chicago, Minneapolis, Houston, Maine, and other locations around the country raises significant skepticism about the agency's professional capability to safely deploy a new tool that could be used to harm Americans without cause. Therefore, we urge ICE to cancel the contract and reconsider the purchase.

On August 10, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a notice concerning ICE's planned acquisition of the CTG-5 G.L.O.V.E., a glove designed to deliver a painful electric shock that is described as a "Conductive Distraction and De-escalation Device," for use by both Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO). The notice estimates the potential value of the acquisition between $10 million and $20 million. Congress has an obligation to ensure that federal law enforcement agencies have the resources necessary to perform their duties safely and effectively while ensuring that taxpayer dollars are being used for tools that are necessary, proportionate, and subject to meaningful safeguards. The proposed acquisition raises serious questions about necessity, proportionality, medical safety, training, accountability, and constitutional rights. Those questions are particularly important given the significant public scrutiny surrounding ICE's excessive use of force. A device capable of delivering an electrical shock through direct contact with an individual presents substantial risks if deployed during civil arrests - even more so if it is deployed without clear limits, appropriate training, and comprehensive oversight.

ICE personnel have access to pepper spray, Tasers, batons, and restraint techniques, not to mention deescalation strategies that are widely used by law enforcement throughout the country. At a time when the American people have demanded de-escalation in immigration enforcement, it is not clear why existing tools and tactics are insufficient for the agency. In the past year, DHS has repeatedly spent millions of taxpayer dollars on purchases it ends up not using, including $464 million for airplanes, $700 million on warehouses, and more than $2.25 million for SUVs wrapped with ICE branding. Many of these ICE transactions, including the planned electric shock glove purchase, are completed through no-bid contracts that circumvent the normal competitive procurement process without a sufficient rationale. This history raises concerns about wasteful spending and unethical contracting practices that could benefit individuals who have personal relationships with administration officials rather than those who can provide the best service at the lowest cost to the taxpayer.

If ICE proceeds with purchasing $20 million worth of electric-shock gloves, Congress needs a clear understanding of the device's safety and authorized uses. The manufacturer identifies restrictions on the device's use, including limitations involving children, pregnant women, elderly or disabled individuals, and repeated or simultaneous use. The manufacturer also warns that use of the electric-shock glove may cause or contribute to death or serious injury, and that longer exposure increases that potential risk. If it proceeds with this contract, ICE must establish and make public clear, enforceable limits on when and against whom the electric-shock gloves may be used, especially given that ICE may not be able to immediately assess whether an individual is pregnant or disabled. Given that ICE is most frequently engaged in civil immigration enforcement rather than criminal arrests, the agency must carefully evaluate whether deployment of the electric-shock gloves in such situations is proportionate to the task.

ICE must also establish and make public the training requirements the agency will put in place prior to and throughout any potential deployment of these gloves. Over the past year, ICE has undermined the public's trust in the agency's training standards by putting new personnel into operational situations who are not properly vetted or adequately trained. Training for ICE recruits was slashed before being extended again following significant backlash. Additionally, ICE has put new recruits in the field before even completing their background checks, with tragic consequences. The issuance of these electric-shock gloves to personnel in the field without sufficient training would be yet another failure of ICE in the eyes of the public.

ICE has continually failed to meet basic standards of transparency and accountability. The electric-shock gloves present a particular accountability challenge because the use of force may cause significant pain and internal injury without necessarily producing obvious visible injuries. If the electric-shock gloves are deployed, ICE must establish a robust system for documenting and reviewing every deployment and instance of use. ICE should not deploy the gloves without evidence that personnel understand and take seriously the device's risks and that individuals subjected to its use can receive an appropriate medical response. ICE must also ensure robust internal procedures for investigating misuse of the device and all use-of-force tools provided to personnel, and effective consequences for those who are found to have abused them.

In light of these many concerns, we request answers to the following questions and production of the documents identified below.

Necessity, Procurement, and Alternatives

1. What specific operational capability does the G.L.O.V.E. provide that existing ICE defensive tactics and less-lethal tools-including pepper spray, Tasers, batons, and restraint techniques-do not? Please provide the operational analysis or other documentation supporting the acquisition.
2. How many electric-shock gloves does ICE intend to purchase, at what projected per-unit cost? How many personnel will be issued the device?
3. What alternatives did ICE consider before selecting the G.L.O.V.E.?
4. Did ICE consult with other law enforcement agencies that use the device regarding effectiveness, injuries, complaints, misuse, training requirements, or other concerns?
5. Please provide the justification for the purchase of the G.L.O.V.E. via a non-competitive contract process.

Safety and Appropriate Use

1. How does ICE classify the G.L.O.V.E. under DHS Use of Force Policy 044-05? Are the electric-shock gloves considered a de-escalation tactic under this policy?
2. In what specific circumstances will use of the electric-shock gloves be authorized?
3. Will use of the electric-shock gloves require supervisory authorization?
4. Which positions and units will carry the device?
5. What is the protocol for usage of the electric-shock gloves? Will ICE personnel be instructed to issue a warning before gloves are activated?
6. Will ICE expressly prohibit use of the electric-shock gloves as a routine compliance or punishment tool?
7. What restrictions will apply to vulnerable populations?
8. Will ICE prohibit the use of the electric-shock gloves against animals?
9. Will ICE prohibit the use of the electric-shock gloves in crowd-control situations?
10. What restrictions will govern the duration and repetition of electrical shocks?
11. Will the electric-shock gloves be authorized for use against U.S. citizens?
12. Will the electric-shock gloves be authorized for use in custodial settings? Will they be authorized for use in removal operations?
13. How will protocol for use differ between HSI and ERO?

Testing, Medical Safety, and Training

1. What testing has DHS or ICE conducted or reviewed concerning the safety and effectiveness of the electric-shock gloves? Please provide all manufacturer testing, independent testing, medical evaluations, risk assessments, and other relevant documentation.
2. Will ICE conduct a limited pilot program before broad deployment? If so, provide the parameters, location, duration, and evaluation criteria for the pilot.
3. What medical contraindications or risks has ICE identified related to use of the electricshock gloves?
4. What training will be required before an officer or agent may carry or use the electricshock gloves? Please provide all existing and proposed training and written guidance concerning the G.L.O.V.E., including curricula, lesson plans, instructor materials, certification standards, policy directives, field guidance, and manufacturer training materials.
5. Will ICE require recurring certification and refresher training? Please provide the certification requirements, frequency of recertification, proficiency standards, and consequences for personnel who fail to maintain certification.

Accountability, Reporting, and Oversight

1. What is the required response when a person is injured or appears to be in medical distress following use of the electric-shock gloves? Please provide the applicable medical response protocols, including requirements for medical evaluation, documentation, notification of supervisors, and preservation of evidence.
2. Will every activation or use of the electric-shock gloves against a person be reported as a use of force?
3. Will ICE require body-worn cameras to be activated and operational whenever the electric-shock gloves are deployed, regardless of whether the officers are in plainclothes?
4. Will every activation require written justification and supervisory review? Please identify who will review these incidents, what factors supervisors must consider, and what specific consequences will apply when personnel violate the applicable restrictions.
5. How will ICE track complaints and injuries? Will ICE maintain and publicly report data concerning internal and external complaints, injuries, improper uses, disciplinary actions, and uses of force involving the electric-shock gloves?
6. How will ICE evaluate, track, and report complaints of civil rights violations involving the use of the electric-shock gloves?
7. Will ICE conduct an independent audit of the program?
8. Please provide records reflecting any internal concerns or objections regarding the electric-shock gloves, including communications involving the Office of Tactical Programs and Firearms.

We request that ICE provide written responses to the questions above and produce the requested documents no later than September 10, 2026. The American people have made it clear that ICE must de-escalate its immigration enforcement operations. ICE must refrain from deployment of the G.L.O.V.E. and instead invest in de-escalation tools, training, and accountability. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

###