U.S. & Constitutional Rights
California bans shock gloves as ICE prepares to deploy 6,000 pairs
California's AB 2760 bars law-enforcement agencies, including federal agencies, from using wearable electroshock gloves in the state through 2029. The law follows ICE's $16.7 million purchase, but whether California can enforce the ban against federal officers is unresolved.
What California enacted
Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 2760 on September 29. The enrolled text prohibits a law-enforcement agency from using a wearable electroshock device in California, bars state funds from being used to buy one and requires agencies to update their use-of-force policies. Its definition includes federal as well as state and local agencies, but excludes pistol-shaped Tasers, stun guns and similar hand-held weapons. [1][2][3]
The restriction is temporary: the provision expires January 1, 2030. Before then, the California Department of Justice's Division of Law Enforcement must study the devices' safety and community effects and report recommendations to lawmakers by January 1, 2029. The text contains no emergency clause, so AP reported the ban will take effect in 2027. [1][3]
The ICE purchase that triggered the bill
AP reported that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement awarded a $16.7 million no-bid contract for 6,000 pairs of gloves plus support equipment and services. ICE's notice said officers could use them during arrests, detainee transport and civil disturbances when a person is actively or passively resisting. The gloves operate normally until an officer activates an electrical mode and touches bare skin. [4][3][5]
ICE said the devices could help officers avoid more severe force and would be used under approved policy, training and accountability standards, but AP said the notice did not explain those standards. Civil-rights advocates and senators asked for public rules governing training, documentation and review. The Department of Homeland Security responded that efforts to ban the equipment would endanger officers. [4]
The federal-enforcement question is not settled
The statute says it applies to federal agencies, but that wording does not settle whether courts will allow California to enforce it against federal officers. AP quoted a constitutional-law professor who expects a Supremacy Clause challenge, and noted that a federal judge previously blocked California's first law restricting officers' face coverings because of how it treated federal, local and state officers differently. [3][5]
No reviewed source identified a lawsuit over AB 2760 at publication time. Until a court rules, the established facts are that California enacted the ban and ICE awarded the glove contract; the law's practical reach over federal operations remains an open legal question. [1][2][3]
Who is affected
The policy affects people encountered by law-enforcement officers in California, including people arrested or transported by immigration agents, protesters near detention facilities and officers choosing among restraint tools. It also affects agencies that must revise their force policies and the state Justice Department, which must complete the safety study. [1][4]
The reviewed sources do not establish that ICE has already issued the purchased gloves to California officers, how many would be assigned in the state or what federal training will require. They also do not establish that the devices are uniformly safer or more dangerous than every alternative use of force; the state study is intended to examine that question. [4][1]
How the sources compare
| Source | What it adds | Scope or limitation |
|---|---|---|
| California Legislature · English | The enacted bill's precise scope, definitions, study requirement and 2030 sunset. | The enrolled text does not decide whether federal courts will permit enforcement against federal officers. |
| Governor of California · English | Primary confirmation that Newsom signed AB 2760 as part of a wider immigration-enforcement package. | The release advocates for the governor's policy and is not an independent legal analysis. |
| Associated Press · English | Independent reporting on the signing, ICE contract, agency rationale, critics and constitutional uncertainty. | The ICE training and accountability rules were not publicly detailed in the reviewed notice. |
| Los Angeles Times · English | California-focused reporting identifying AB 2760 and the wider package signed the same day. | The report describes likely litigation but cannot establish how courts will rule. |
What remains unclear
Whether and when the federal government will challenge California's application of the law to federal officers.
How many of ICE's 6,000 purchased gloves will be issued in California and under what written deployment rules.
The comparative safety findings California's Justice Department must report by January 1, 2029.
Sources & translations
- California Legislature — AB 2760: Law enforcement: wearable electroshock devices — enrolled text
- Governor of California — Governor Newsom signs bills to push back on Trump's Orwellian immigration tactics to protect immigrant communities
- Associated Press — Newsom signs law banning officers from using shock gloves
- Associated Press — ICE awards $16.7M contract to buy 6,000 pairs of gloves that deliver electric shocks
- Los Angeles Times — No electric shock gloves, face coverings: Newsom pushes back on Trump's immigration agenda
Updates & corrections
- — Initial report confirms the signed text and separates the enacted state rule from the unresolved constitutional question over federal enforcement.