By Antonio Ray Harvey
Contributing Writer
SACRAMENTO — A bill temporarily prohibiting law enforcement agencies from using electric shock gloves in California is awaiting action by Gov. Gavin Newsom.
Assembly Bill 2760, authored by Assemblywoman LaShae Sharp-Collins, D-San Diego, passed the Senate 29-9 on Aug. 31. The Assembly concurred in Senate amendments the same day on a 55-16 vote.
The bill would prohibit state, local and federal law enforcement agencies from using wearable electroshock devices in California until Jan. 1, 2030. It would also bar agencies from using state funds to purchase the devices and require them to update their use-of-force policies accordingly.
Traditional handheld devices, including tasers and stun guns, are exempt.
Newsom has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto the bill. If he takes no action, it will become law without his signature.
Sharp-Collins introduced the measure after reviewing information indicating that the devices could cause serious injury or death if used without adequate safeguards and training.
“AB 2760 draws a line that public safety technology must be proven safe and accountable before it is employed,” Sharp-Collins said. “Not after someone is killed or injured.
“Our commitment is to protect our communities, especially the most vulnerable. That is what AB 2760 is about and that is what AB 2760 will do,” Sharp-Collins told her colleagues.
The device at the center of the debate is known as the GLOVE, an acronym for Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement awarded a $16.7 million contract for 6,000 pairs of the gloves, which are designed to deliver an electric shock through an officer’s hand.
For most of the legislative session, AB 2760 addressed an unrelated subject. The original proposal would have authorized county boards of supervisors to establish inspectors general to oversee agencies such as animal control departments and county probation offices.
On Aug. 21, Sharp-Collins used a legislative procedure known as “gut and amend” to replace the bill’s original language with provisions restricting wearable electroshock devices. The revised measure was fast-tracked during the closing days of the session.
The initial version sought a broader prohibition, but it was revised following opposition from law enforcement organizations. The final language establishes a temporary moratorium and directs the California Department of Justice to study the devices’ safety and community effects.
The department must report its findings and recommend standards and safeguards to the Legislature by Jan. 1, 2029.
“AB 2760 emerged as a last-minute gut-and-amend prohibiting wearable electroshock devices, the Peace Officers Research Association of Calironia stated on its website. “PORAC immediately engaged and secured amendments protecting traditional handheld/Taser devices, replacing the prohibition with a three-year moratorium and requiring a [Department of Jutsice] study.”
During the Assembly debate, Assemblywoman Rhodesia Ransom, D-Stockton, thanked law enforcement representatives for helping negotiate the amendments.
“This is something new to us (and) it’s something that absolutely should be studied,” Ransom said. “I appreciate law enforcement for agreeing to work with the Legislature to figure out if this is an appropriate tool to be used.”
Neither the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department nor the Los Angeles Police Department has reported using electric shock gloves. However, the Santa Monica and El Monte police departments have obtained devices for testing.
The Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office purchased 10 shock gloves as part of a $35,000 acquisition that also included 10 remotely activated shock bands. Sheriff’s officials had been developing training and policies for the devices before AB 2760 advanced.
State Sen. Tony Strickland, R-Huntington Beach, opposed the legislation, arguing that it would unnecessarily force agencies to change their use-of-force policies and could compromise public safety.
“I don’t disagree with the author that the electric shocks are not a great option, but at the end of the day, I think it’s important to understand that we need to give law enforcement the tools they need to keep themselves safe and the community safe,” Strickland said.
Supporters countered that wearable electroshock devices have not been sufficiently studied and could pose particular risks to immigrants, children, older adults and other vulnerable groups.
Although AB 2760 expressly includes federal agencies, that provision could face a legal challenge. Under the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause, states generally cannot regulate how federal officers perform their official duties. The bill’s restrictions on state and local agencies would not raise the same federalism question.
Assemblyman Mark González, D-Los Angeles, a member of the Assembly Public Safety Committee, warned that the devices could be used disproportionately against immigrants and people of color.
“People who are Black or brown could be test subjects for these gloves of torment,” González said. “I appreciate law enforcement for agreeing to work with the Legislature.”
Antonio Ray Harvey writes for California Black Media.
