The massive $1.1 trillion spending bill (“omnibus”) passed by Congress last week and signed into law by President Obama includes a significant victory: a provision aimed at ending the atrocious practice of shackling pregnant women in immigration detention facilities.

Yes, you read that right. The shackling of pregnant women being held in immigration detention is still a thing in the United States.

In fact, a Fusion investigation found that an El Paso, Texas, immigration detention center held 13 pregnant women between August and November of 2013—the official ICE spokesperson’s initial response to the event? “We don’t detain pregnant women.”

Thankfully, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) was able to get language included in the omnibus that she and Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) had originally drafted as an amendment to the Senate immigration reform bill, requiring ICE to “ensure all detention contracts and agreements implement the Use of Force exception for all pregnant women in ICE detention.”

Because one half of all ICE detainees are held in county jails, this language represents an important step in unifying detention standards for these facilities and upholding basic humane and safe practices. Currently, pregnant prisoners may be shackled, and sometimes even forced to give birth while shackled, depending on the state: Though 18 states have enacted laws prohibiting or restricting shackling of pregnant prisoners, the other 32 states have no laws protecting women from these practices. This incongruity occurs despite existing official ICE policy that states that pregnant women “shall not be restrained absent truly extraordinary circumstances,” and that “restraints are never permitted on women who are in active labor or delivery.”

Though not all is positive in the omnibus appropriations bill, this provision is a hard-fought civil liberties victory will make sure that ICE, rather than turn a blind eye, holds local facilities accountable.

Learn more about immigration detention and other civil liberty issues: Sign up for breaking news alertsfollow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.

View comments (6)
Read the Terms of Use

A little help here

Can you explain to me why a pregnant lawbreaker has superior treatment to one who is not pregnant? The article is short and failed to articulate that rather important point.


"...ending the atrocious practice of shackling pregnant women in immigration detention facilities". I think that clarifies the situation. I feel confident that pregnant individuals accused of violent crimes are not reflected in this article.


I'm pregnant, and I'm clumsy enough without shackles. I think the "superior treatment" (caugh) that pregnant woman can now receive, was implemented more for the safety of the innocent child.


it dont mayter if ur pregnant or not, if you've commited a crime, you should be treated like everyone else. and if your pregnant, you should thinkg about ur fetus n not commit a crime in the first place


it dont matter if ur pregnant or not, commit the crime, del wth the punishment. just because your pregnant doesnt mean you "deserve" special treatment. if you chose to commit a crime you deserve to face the consequence just like anyone else.


I wouldn't consider it "special treatment" to not shackle a pregnant woman. I would call it "humane treatment." Quite frankly, people shouldn't be shackled, period, unless circumstances suggest that it would be appropriate to do so. The fact that a person is being held in immigration detention does not, in and of itself, suggest that it is realistic to require shackles for that person. And the article does say that in extreme circumstances (presumably those in which she would pose some sort of threat) a pregnant woman may be shackled.

Stay Informed