Federal Agents Deploy Banned Restraint Techniques Amid Heightened Enforcement Operations A recent investigation has revealed a troubling pattern of U.S. immigration enforcement agents utilizing physical restraint techniques that are officially prohibited or strongly discouraged by federal guidelines, raising significant questions about operational discipline and the broader implications for civil liberties within federal enforcement agencies. The findings detail more than 40 documented cases over the past year where agents employed moves, including chokeholds and prolonged neck restraints, capable of cutting off airflow or blood circulation.
These tactics were widely banned or curtailed across U.S. law enforcement following the 2020 murder of George Floyd, yet evidence suggests they are resurfacing within Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol operations, particularly amidst heightened deportation efforts. Incidents documented range from agents applying knee pressure to the necks of handcuffed individuals to the use of vascular neck restraints on civilians and protesters.
Experts in law enforcement training, reviewing the compiled footage, expressed alarm, characterizing the maneuvers as indicative of “bad policing” that risks severe injury or death. Gil Kerlikowske, former Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, noted that such actions would warrant immediate disciplinary review within standard police departments. This is especially critical given that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy generally prohibits such restraints unless the level of force authorized is potentially lethal.
The context of these deployments is crucial. The resurgence of these high-risk maneuvers coincides with a period of intense scrutiny following several high-profile use-of-force incidents involving federal agents in cities like Minneapolis and Portland. While DHS leadership has consistently defended its agents, asserting they adhere to training and use necessary force, the documented incidents appear to contradict these assurances, particularly as agents often operate masked and with opaque accountability mechanisms.
The lack of centralized tracking by the government for the use of prohibited force complicates any objective assessment of the trend’s scale. Analysis of legal filings and public media suggests that former officials rarely encountered such incidents during their tenure, indicating a potential shift in operational norms since the 2023 formal codification of restraint bans within DHS.
Geopolitically, the consistent use of aggressive, potentially unlawful force by federal agents during domestic enforcement operations can impact international perceptions of U.S. adherence to human rights standards and the rule of law. Furthermore, incidents involving U.S. citizens caught in immigration enforcement actions underscore the domestic political sensitivity surrounding the scope and execution of federal immigration mandates.
Until federal agencies provide transparent data on investigations and disciplinary actions related to these incidents, the perception remains that high-risk restraint tactics are being normalized within the operational framework of border and interior enforcement, challenging established departmental policies and inviting further legislative oversight.
Source Attribution: Based on investigative findings reported by ProPublica.