Donald Trump plans to reintroduce the use of electronic bracelets to monitor illegal immigrants in the United States during his second presidential term.
These devices, attached to the ankle, track the movements of individuals placed under judicial control.
Initially designed for people on probation, parole, or awaiting trial, they are also used for convicts deemed to be at low risk of reoffending.
Considering that this technology involves a considerable investment, its application to immigrants with no criminal record had been restricted under the Biden administration.
The reinstatement of these devices raises major concerns. Far from constituting a real alternative to incarceration, their use risks disproportionately broadening the scope of migration laws.
Experts point out that these bracelets are particularly humiliating and can have significant psychological effects on the wearers, raising crucial questions about their relevance, ethics, and effectiveness.
Donald Trump’s team sees this measure as part of an overall strategy to tighten border controls and step up deportations. Currently, this program, integrated into Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) “Alternatives to Detention,” monitors over 25,000 migrants using electronic devices. However, the cost to taxpayers is far from negligible, reaching around $80,000 per day.
While electronic surveillance is sometimes presented as a cost-effective solution compared with detention centers, its limitations are numerous. Electronic bracelets, the most restrictive form of this technology, are the subject of a growing debate on their effects on the fundamental rights and freedoms of migrants.
Critics see these devices as a modern form of humiliation, particularly when they are visible in public. They restrict freedom of movement, amplify social stigmatization, and often aggravate the psychological distress of individuals awaiting a decision on their migration status.
On the other hand, supporters of the program see it as a necessary compromise. In their view, it offers migrants the opportunity to remain in the community while guaranteeing their attendance at court hearings. Ron Vitiello, former director of ICE, stresses that these measures do not replace detention but are part of a comprehensive approach that includes the expansion of detention centers and enhanced monitoring.
For Donald Trump and his team, the electronic bracelet is presented as a preventive measure against immigrant crime. However, this rhetoric is contradicted by statistical data showing that illegal immigrants are ten times less likely to commit crimes. These migrants are generally portrayed as law-abiding individuals seeking above all to improve their families’ living conditions.
Despite its role in monitoring migrants, the effectiveness of the electronic bracelet remains relative. Incidents where individuals have cut off their bracelets in order to disappear have highlighted the limits of the system. In a high-profile case, an individual accused of serious offenses managed to escape surveillance by removing his bracelet.
In financial terms, although this program is less costly than traditional detention, its budget remains substantial. With daily expenses exceeding $80,000, questions are being raised about its relevance. Moreover, its human impact – including stigmatization, restrictions on freedom, and psychological disorders – adds further complexity to the debate.
From a societal point of view, expansion of the program could worsen relations between immigrant communities and the authorities. Fear of constant surveillance may deter individuals from seeking essential services, reporting crimes, or engaging in community activities.
Listen to the article