Executive Summary
- Legislation Introduced: Rep. Delia Ramirez sponsored the “Full Body Restraint Prohibition Act” to ban DHS from using the WRAP device.
- Investigative Basis: The bill follows an AP investigation linking the device to potential misuse and 12 deaths in local police custody over the last decade.
- Financial Context: Records show DHS spent nearly $270,000 on the devices since 2015, with 91% of spending occurring during the Trump administrations.
- Manufacturer Position: Safe Restraints Inc. defends the device as a humane alternative to other tactics, warning that a ban could lead to more dangerous methods.
WASHINGTON — Legislation introduced Wednesday in the U.S. House of Representatives seeks to bar the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from utilizing a full-body restraint mechanism known as the WRAP. The "Full Body Restraint Prohibition Act," sponsored by U.S. Representative Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), follows an Associated Press investigation that highlighted the device’s extensive use by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and its association with fatalities in local law enforcement custody.
Representative Ramirez stated that the proposed measure aims to prohibit future procurement of the device while establishing rigorous oversight and reporting protocols. In a statement supporting the bill, Ramirez referenced AP findings revealing that ICE agents have deployed the restraints on detainees for prolonged periods during deportation flights, a practice documented as far back as 2020. She described the device as a tool that "fuels destruction" and causes "pain and violence."
The WRAP, manufactured by California-based Safe Restraints Inc., is designed to immobilize a subject’s legs and torso. While the manufacturer asserts the device is a "safer, more humane" alternative to other methods, federal lawsuits have alleged its incorrect usage amounts to punishment or torture. The AP investigation identified 12 cases over the last decade where autopsies cited "restraint" as a contributing factor in deaths occurring in local police or jail custody involving the WRAP.
According to federal purchasing records cited in the report, DHS has paid Safe Restraints Inc. $268,523 since late 2015. Data indicates that approximately 91 percent of this expenditure occurred during the two administrations of President Donald Trump. While the manufacturer noted that a modified version was created for ICE to facilitate long-duration transport, ICE internal policies reportedly allow for deployment at a lower threshold than recommended by the company. Detainees interviewed during the investigation alleged the restraints were used as intimidation tactics or retaliation for requesting legal counsel.
It is important to note that while allegations of civil rights violations and misuse have been raised in lawsuits and reports, no criminal charges against specific agents regarding these incidents were cited in the legislative announcement.
Legislative & Regulatory Impact
The introduction of the Full Body Restraint Prohibition Act marks a significant legislative pivot toward stricter oversight of federal law enforcement equipment standards. If enacted, this bill would not only strip DHS of a specific tactical tool but also set a precedent for congressional intervention in the operational protocols of immigration enforcement agencies. The move highlights a growing tension between officer safety equipment procurement and civil liberties advocacy, potentially forcing DHS to revise its use-of-force continuum and transport logistics. Furthermore, the reliance on investigative journalism to prompt legislative action underscores the critical role of external oversight in identifying potential systemic liabilities within federal policing structures.
