ICE’s increasing reliance on full-body WRAP restraints during deportations has sparked widespread alarm, with advocates and internal government reports condemning the device’s potential for inhumane treatment, psychological harm, and even death, often used on already shackled immigrants simply for protesting their removal.
The harrowing accounts of individuals subjected to full-body restraints during deportations by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) are drawing a spotlight on practices described by some as inhumane and torturous. Referred to by detainees as “the burrito” or “the bag,” the WRAP restraint device has become a controversial element in ICE’s deportation protocols, particularly during long international flights.
In a striking example, a Nigerian man recounted being roused in the middle of the night in September, shackled hand and foot, and told he was being sent to Ghana—a country none of the detainees were from. When they requested to speak with their attorney, officers allegedly refused and proceeded to straitjacket the already-restrained men in the WRAP suits before loading them onto a 16-hour flight to West Africa. He described the experience to The Associated Press as “just like a kidnapping,” speaking from a detainment camp in Ghana as part of a federal lawsuit. This account, and others like it, underscore a pattern of use that diverges sharply from the manufacturer’s stated intent for the device.
Widespread Use and Mounting Concerns
The Associated Press has documented numerous instances of ICE deploying the black-and-yellow WRAP device in deportations. Five individuals interviewed by the AP detailed being restrained for hours on flights dating back to 2020. Additionally, witnesses and family members in four countries reported its use on at least seven other people this year. The use of these restraints has become a significant focal point for civil rights advocates.
Despite internal reservations voiced in a 2023 report by the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ICE has continued its reliance on the WRAP. These concerns were partly fueled by reports of deaths linked to the device’s use by local law enforcement agencies. Over the past decade, the AP has identified twelve fatal cases where local police or jailers in the U.S. used the WRAP, and autopsies concluded that “restraint” played a role in the death.
A growing number of federal lawsuits are challenging the use of the WRAP, equating its improper deployment to punishment and even torture, whether in jails or during international deportation flights. A primary concern among advocates is ICE’s failure to track the device’s usage, a requirement under federal law when officers employ force.
Manufacturer’s Intent vs. ICE’s Practices
Safe Restraints Inc., the California-based maker of the WRAP, asserts that the device was designed as a “lifesaver” for law enforcement dealing with erratic individuals who pose a physical threat to themselves or officers. DHS has spent over $268,523 on these devices since late 2015, with approximately 91% of that spending occurring under the Trump administrations. However, ICE has been reluctant to provide records detailing its frequency of use.
The AP’s investigation indicates that ICE officials employ a considerably lower threshold for deploying the WRAP than advised by the manufacturer. Detainees recounted being placed in the restraints after already being shackled, often as a form of intimidation or punishment for requesting legal counsel or expressing fear of deportation to dangerous regions. One West African deportee described a grueling, hours-long experience that left his legs so swollen he walked with a limp, stating, “They bundled me and my colleagues, tied us up in a straitjacket.”
ICE and DHS have declined to provide their official policy on the use of the WRAP. DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin stated that restraints on detainees during deportation flights are a “long-standing, standard ICE protocol” essential for safety, aligning with “established legal standards.” However, specific authorities or detailed practices were not disclosed.
Noah Baron, an attorney for West African deportees, unequivocally declared, “The use of these devices is inhumane and incompatible with our nation’s fundamental values.” Charles Hammond, CEO of Safe Restraints Inc., confirmed that a modified version of the WRAP was created for ICE to allow for longer use during flights, featuring a front ring for cuffed hands and “soft elbow cuffs” for limited movement and circulation. However, when an AP reporter detailed accounts of non-violent, verbally protesting detainees being wrapped while already shackled, Hammond acknowledged this could constitute improper use. “That’s not the purpose of the WRAP,” he stated, emphasizing that restraints are justified only if a deportee poses a “current or potential risk to themselves, to officers, to staff, to the plane.”
The ‘Bag’ and Broken Promises: Juan Antonio Pineda’s Ordeal
Juan Antonio Pineda, an El Salvadoran national legally residing in the U.S., described being placed in “a bag” – the black-and-yellow striped WRAP – by immigration officers in late September. He was driven to the Mexico border after being detained by ICE during a routine appointment, despite being shown deportation documents with someone else’s name. Pineda alleged that after refusing to sign deportation papers, officers broke his right arm and gave him a black eye, then drove him back in the WRAP for another four hours. His video shows him with a cast and facial bruising, though the AP could not independently confirm how his injuries occurred.
The next day, Pineda was again tied up, put in the WRAP, and driven back to the border, only to be turned away by Mexican officials. He recounted in a video shared by his wife, Xiomara Ochoa, that he received no food or water during the eight-hour round trip. Pineda was eventually deported to Mexico. ICE did not respond to requests for comment regarding his case.
The Human Cost: Injuries and Psychological Trauma
Beyond the Nigerian man, four other individuals interviewed by the AP were placed in the WRAP for deportation flights since the first Trump administration. As immigration officials aggressively pursue deportation goals, advocates highlight the government’s own civil rights inquiry suggesting that ICE officers lack adequate training on restraint use.
Fatma Marouf, a Texas A&M law professor who has sued ICE over its use of the device, emphasized that the WRAP should be a “last resort” and that being bound in such a manner can inflict “a lot of psychological harm.” A lawsuit filed on behalf of the Nigerian man and four others detained in Dema Camp, Ghana, includes an allegation that ICE left one man in the restraint suit for 16 hours, only briefly undoing the lower part for a bathroom break. Another man, deported to Cape Verde in 2023, suffered a concussion and dislocated jaw after being placed in the device before a 10-hour flight. He described it as “the most painful thing I’ve been through,” adding that a metal ring, part of ICE’s comfort modifications, dug into his chest, causing bruising when he was slammed face forward.
ICE’s continued use of the WRAP unfolds amidst an aggressive campaign by federal immigration officers, leading to accusations that the Trump administration has dehumanized immigrants, subjecting them to cruel and unusual detention conditions, as reported by The Associated Press. The practice persists despite the 2023 DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) report which raised significant concerns about the absence of clear policies governing its use. While ICE partially agreed with the internal findings, it challenged the classification of the WRAP as a “four-point restraint,” a designation that would impose greater limitations. Disturbingly, DHS later largely dismantled the CRCL office, dismissing it as an impediment to enforcement operations, according to an AP article. The CRCL report authors concluded, “Without changes to the current training, and the lack of policy, CRCL has serious concerns about ICE’s continued use of the WRAP.”
Tragic Parallels: Deaths in Local Law Enforcement
The dangers associated with restraint devices like the WRAP are not confined to immigration enforcement. Last year in Virginia Beach, Virginia, police officers placed Rolin Hill in the WRAP during an arrest. He was left in the device at the jail, where surveillance video shows deputies punching the immobilized Hill. Hill later died, his death ruled a homicide due to “positional and mechanical asphyxia due to restraint with neck and torso compression,” with three deputies now charged with his murder, as reported by The Associated Press. Similarly, in Missouri last year, five jailers were charged in the death of Othel Moore Jr., who asphyxiated in the WRAP. Footage showed Moore, also tear-gassed and fitted with a “spit mask,” repeatedly stating he couldn’t breathe.
An AP investigation into deaths following police use of force identified 43 incidents where the WRAP was used by police or correctional officers in cases where someone died. In 12 of these, official autopsies indicated “restraint” played a role. Determining the WRAP’s exact contribution is often complex, as other forms of force and substance use (e.g., methamphetamine) were frequently involved.
The WRAP emerged in law enforcement in the late 1990s as an alternative to “hog-tying.” It is now used by over 1,800 departments nationwide, with more than 10,000 devices sold by its manufacturer. However, some cases, like that of Alberto Pena in 2020, highlight continued issues. Pena, jailed for misdemeanor criminal mischief, became erratic and self-harmed. Deputies placed him in the WRAP for over two hours, during which he repeatedly cried for help and complained of an inability to breathe, but received no medical attention for his head injuries. While his death was ruled “accidental,” a forensic pathologist hired by his family attributed it partly to “prolonged restraint” and argued it could have been prevented with proper medical care. The Starr County Sheriff’s Office denied wrongdoing, and a federal judge dismissed the family’s lawsuit.
‘Carrying Me Like a Corpse’: The Detainee Experience
Despite the controversies, Safe Restraints Inc. CEO Hammond argues that the WRAP’s use can be justified in the context of ICE deportation flights to secure individuals who might pose a risk on long journeys. He states that properly trained agents should loosen straps for detainees to eat, drink, and use the bathroom, claiming that the WRAP, when used correctly, “prioritizes breathing” and leads to “a shorter fight.”
However, detainees’ experiences paint a starkly different picture. One man recalled being shackled and stumbling while boarding a flight to Cameroon in November 2020, which an officer mistook for resistance. He was then quickly pushed onto the tarmac and into a WRAP device. “They bundled me like a log of wood from all the sides and they were just carrying me like a corpse,” he said. Another Cameroonian man, fleeing political violence, was placed in the WRAP after initially resisting a deportation flight in 2020. He reported officers leaving him in the device for hours in view of other detainees as a warning. When he told an officer, “I can’t breathe,” the response was, “I don’t care, I’m doing my job.”
A Call for Transparency and Ethical Enforcement
The documented use of the WRAP full-body restraints by ICE raises profound questions about human rights, appropriate force, and governmental transparency. From the lack of internal policy tracking to the disturbing accounts of alleged abuse and the parallels with fatalities in local law enforcement, the evidence points to a critical need for reform. Advocates continue to call for clear policies, comprehensive training, and accountability to ensure that no individual undergoing deportation is subjected to treatment deemed inhumane and incompatible with fundamental human values.
