Pentagon Authorizes Testing of Non-Lethal Heat-Ray Technology along Southern Border
Washington, Wednesday, 21 October 2026.
The US Defense Department authorized Homeland Security to evaluate a non-lethal heat ray along the southern border, marking a significant shift toward military-grade technology in civilian crowd management.
Authorization Overview
In a significant shift toward military-grade technology in civilian crowd management, the U.S. Department of Defense has granted authorization to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to test directed-energy thermal weapons along the U.S.-Mexico border [1][2]. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth signed a memorandum in September 2026, permitting the DHS to borrow an Active Denial System (ADS) for a seven-month period beginning that same month [1][2]. This authorization marks a transition from internal discussion to active testing, with the DHS holding exclusive responsibility for the system’s tactical use and development [1][3].
Technology Details
The Active Denial System is a non-lethal, directed-energy weapon designed to emit invisible electromagnetic waves that create an intense, oven-like burning sensation upon skin contact [1][3]. This sensation persists for 10 to 15 minutes, triggering an instinctive and irresistible urge to flee the affected area [3][4]. While the US military previously deployed the ADS in Afghanistan nearly two decades ago, it was not utilized in active combat operations during that tenure [1][4].
OPERATIONAL MECHANICS AND RANGE
Technical specifications indicate the system projects an invisible beam of electromagnetic waves effective up to approximately 0.8 kilometers, which converts to 800 meters [3][4]. Other reports describe the range as slightly more than 0.5 miles, aligning with the metric conversion [1][3]. The memorandum stipulates that the system shall not be operated by Department of Defense personnel, effectively offloading operational responsibility to the DHS for the duration of the loan [1][2].
Historical Precedents
Internal discussions regarding the use of ADS for crowd dispersal on the U.S.-Mexico border have occurred over several years, including considerations during the tenure of current CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott [2][4]. In 2018, prior to the midterm elections, then-Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen rejected a proposal to use the ADS against immigrants [1][4]. Additionally, US officials previously considered deploying the system during domestic unrest, including the protests following the murder of George Floyd during the end of Donald Trump’s first presidential term [1][4].
HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND ETHICAL OVERSIGHT
Previous internal deliberations regarding the ADS raised significant concerns regarding legalities, use of force, sovereignty, and the potential for secondary harm, such as migrants drowning if incapacitated while near the river [3][4]. A former CBP official noted the ethical dilemma, questioning if the cost and training were justified given the risks [3][4]. Another former DHS official highlighted the thematic issue of treating immigrants and citizens like enemy combatants, noting that inhumane treatments typically get rejected [3][4].
Strategic Implications
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) states it is continually evaluating new technologies, especially those that enhance operational effectiveness and strengthen mission capabilities [1][3]. The current loan agreement allows for the DHS to request an extension after the seven-month period concludes if deemed necessary for continued operations [1][4]. This trial period will likely inform future procurement decisions and regulatory scrutiny around non-lethal defense technologies in domestic applications [1][2].
FUTURE POLICY TRAJECTORY
The seven-month loan period is scheduled to conclude in April 2027, calculated from the September 2026 start date [1][2]. At the conclusion of this period, the DHS may submit a request for an extension or further use of the system for border operations [1][4]. The outcome of this testing phase will be critical in determining whether this technology becomes a permanent fixture in U.S. border management tactics [1][3].