Assembly Bill 2760 seeks to ban the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from utilizing electric shock gloves in California, following a federal contract award for thousands of the devices. Democratic state lawmakers advanced the legislation in a late-session maneuver as part of a broader state-level push to check federal immigration enforcement actions.
Legislative Push and Federal Contracts
Democratic lawmakers advanced Assembly Bill 2760 through the legislature during an eleventh-hour “gut and amend” process, according to CalMatters. Introduced by San Diego Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins, the measure would prohibit ICE agents as well as state and local officers from wearing any device capable of delivering electric shocks. It would also block California police departments from purchasing the technology using state funds.
The legislative push follows a Department of Homeland Security notice published earlier this month, stating that ICE sought to spend up to $20 million on taser-like gloves. According to CalMatters, ICE announced it awarded a $16.7 million contract to Kentucky-based Compliant Technologies for 6,000 pairs of the devices, marketed under the product name G.L.O.V.E. for Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter.
Federal lawmakers have also mobilized against the purchase. U.S. Senator Alex Padilla and other congressional Democrats sent a letter to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin urging the administration to cancel the contract, describing the equipment in the letter as “hand-worn tasers disguised as restraint equipment,” as reported by CalMatters.
Local Law Enforcement Divergence
The legislation has exposed deep divisions among California law enforcement agencies regarding the tactical utility of the shock gloves. Sacramento County Sheriff Jim Cooper confirmed that his department spent $35,000 to purchase 10 of the devices and trained deputies to use them, though none have been deployed during an on-duty incident, according to CBS News.
Cooper criticized Assembly Bill 2760 during a news conference, characterizing the measure as a “knee-jerk reaction” by the state legislature to federal actions. He argued that the gloves generate a lower voltage than standard Tasers and provide deputies with a vital alternative option for taking individuals into custody, potentially reducing injuries to both officers and detainees.
“It is very effective, so it saves lives. It prevents injuries,” Cooper said, as reported by CBS News.
Conversely, the California State Sheriffs’ Association opposes the measure, with lobbyist Cory Salzillo arguing at a legislative hearing that the bill unnecessarily restricts de-escalation tools while sending an ineffective message to federal authorities.
Civil rights organizations and proponents of the bill maintain that the technology presents unwarranted risks. Anallely Martin of the California Immigrant Policy Center argued at a hearing covered by CalMatters that electroshock gloves deployed by law enforcement decrease public safety. Assemblymember Sharp-Collins similarly warned that the devices are unproven and dangerous, stating that the state should not wait for a severe injury or fatality to occur.
Legal Hurdles and Federal Authority
Legal experts note that Assembly Bill 2760 faces substantial constitutional hurdles if enacted. UC Davis law professor Vikram Amar told CalMatters that states generally lack the authority to regulate how federal officers perform their jobs, meaning the legislation would likely hold little weight in court without a clear demonstration that the gloves violate constitutional rights.
The measure arrives alongside contemporaneous actions by California Democrats aimed at federal immigration enforcement, including legislation to prevent federal agents from working alongside local police and another intended to facilitate civil rights lawsuits against agents. Those measures mirror prior state efforts, such as a 2025 law requiring masked immigration agents to identify themselves, which was struck down by a federal court in April for overstepping state bounds.
Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom has not yet acted on the bill, leaving the timeline for potential executive action and subsequent legal challenges uncertain.
