Attorney Tells Congressional Committee How Banks Targeted Family Council and Other Conservatives

Recently attorney Jeremy Tedesco, Senior Counsel and Senior Vice President of Corporate Engagement for Alliance Defending Freedom testified before a congressional committee about how big banks have targeted Family Council and other conservative organizations.

On March 6, the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government released a report indicating the federal government weaponized banks against conservatives.

The report shows that after the events of January 6, 2021, federal law enforcement officials from the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and the FBI initiated multiple discussions with financial institutions to discuss ways financial institutions could share customer information with federal law enforcement outside of normal legal processes.

The U.S. Treasury Department gave banks and other financial institutions guiding “typologies” — patterns that could be used to identify suspicious people or activities — including search terms and patterns like “TRUMP” and “MAGA”, and encouraged financial institutions to comb through transactions for terms like, “Bass Pro Shops,” “Cabela’s,” and “Dick’s Sporting Goods” when looking for “Homegrown Violent Extremism.”

The report also reveals the Treasury Department provided banks and financial institutions with an analysis that listed legitimate, conservative groups such as Alliance Defending Freedom, the American College of Pediatricians, American Family Association, Eagle Forum, Family Research Council, Liberty Counsel, National Organization for Marriage, and the Ruth Institute as “Hate Groups” alongside the KKK and the American Nazi Party.

On March 7attorney Jeremy Tedesco, Senior Counsel and Senior Vice President of Corporate Engagement for Alliance Defending Freedom, told the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government how big banks have targeted other conservative organizations like Family Council.

In his remarks, Mr. Tedesco said,

JP Morgan Chase de-banked the Arkansas Family Council for being “high risk” and never provided a credible reason for canceling the account of former U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback’s organization the National Committee for Religious Freedom. And Wells Fargo denied payment processing to the pro-life group The Ruth Institute. These are some of the many instances of viewpoint-based de-banking and are likely only the tip of the iceberg.

These stories highlight the systemic risk of political and religious bias that pervades the financial industry, particularly at the largest banks and payment processors. These institutions maintain reputational risk policies that allow them unfettered discretion to punish customers who have, in their view, problematic political or religious views. Many also have prohibitions on “hate” speech and “intolerance” that require the institution to make subjective and value-based judgments on a customer’s viewpoint. Both types of policies are vague and ambiguous, sweep in broad swaths of content, chill constitutionally protected speech, and erode economic freedom.

Worse, government regulators can all too easily wield their outsized power over financial institutions to pressure them to leverage these against disfavored views—all with virtually no public accountability. Financial institutions in turn can hide behind that same shield to discriminate without ever explaining it to the customer—regardless of whether the action was prompted by government pressure.

In 2021 Family Council’s credit card processor terminated our account after designating our organization as “high risk.”

At 10:29 AM on Wednesday, July 7, 2021, our office received a terse email from our credit card processor — a company owned by JPMorgan Chase — saying, “Unfortunately, we can no longer support your business. We wish you all the luck in the future, and hope that you find a processor that better fits your payment processing needs.”

Within sixty seconds, our account was terminated and and Family Council could no longer accept donations online. We never received any further explanation concerning our abrupt, unprofessional cancelation. All we can do is speculate that our conservative principles and our public policy work might have had something to do with the decision to close our account.

You can watch Jeremy Tedesco’s full congressional testimony below or read it here.

Congressional Report Says Federal Government Weaponized Banks Against Conservative Groups

Last week the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government released a report indicating the federal government weaponized banks against conservatives.

The interim report released last Wednesday cites evidence revealing:

  • After the events of January 6, 2021, federal law enforcement officials from the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and the FBI initiated multiple discussions with financial institutions to discuss ways financial institutions could share customer information with federal law enforcement outside of normal legal processes.
  • Law enforcement and private institutions shared intelligence through a web portal run by the Domestic Security Alliance Council — a partnership led by the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security.
  • The U.S. Treasury Department gave banks and other financial institutions guiding “typologies” — patterns that could be used to identify suspicious people or activities — including search terms and patterns like “TRUMP” and “MAGA”, and encouraged financial institutions to comb through transactions for terms like, “Bass Pro Shops,” “Cabela’s,” and “Dick’s Sporting Goods” when looking for “Homegrown Violent Extremism.”
  • “Americans doing nothing other than shopping or exercising their Second Amendment rights were being tracked by financial institutions and federal law enforcement.”

The report also reveals the Treasury Department provided banks and financial institutions with an analysis titled “Bankrolling Bigotry.” This analysis listed legitimate, conservative groups such as Alliance Defending Freedom, the American College of Pediatricians, American Family Association, Eagle Forum, Family Research Council, Liberty Counsel, National Organization for Marriage, and the Ruth Institute as “Hate Groups” alongside the KKK and the American Nazi Party.

The “Bankrolling Bigotry” analysis also outlines ideas on policies and laws aimed at preventing these groups from fundraising. Officials from the Treasury Department distributed this document to banks and financial institutions in January of 2021, calling it an “overview on the funding of American hate groups.”

Other outlets have reported in the past how government policies allegedly encourage banks to designate conservative organizations as posing a “high risk” or “reputational risk” — giving the banks an excuse to close their accounts.

In 2021 Family Council’s credit card processor terminated our account after designating our organization as “high risk.”

At 10:29 AM on Wednesday, July 7, 2021, our office received a terse email from our credit card processor — a company owned by JPMorgan Chase — saying, “Unfortunately, we can no longer support your business. We wish you all the luck in the future, and hope that you find a processor that better fits your payment processing needs.”

Within sixty seconds, our account was terminated and and Family Council could no longer accept donations online. All we can do is speculate that our conservative principles and our public policy work might have had something to do with the decision to close our account.

Unfortunately, other organizations have had similar experiences as well. This congressional report sheds light on how the federal government weaponized financial institutions against conservative groups.

You Can Read Entire Interim Committee Report Here.

Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.

Liam’s Dangerous T-Shirt: Guest Column

The First Circuit Court of Appeals will soon decide whether a public middle school can ban a student from wearing a T-shirt with the phrase “[t]here are only two genders.” Earlier this month, the Alliance Defending Freedom argued on behalf of Liam Morrison, who was sent home for wearing the shirt, while his Massachusetts school had proactively encouraged students to wear shirts with pro-LGBTQ messages during a school-imposed Pride week.  

A lawyer for the school argued that the phrase on Liam’s shirt was not merely offensive but put classmates who struggle with gender dysphoria at risk of “significant harm.” That’s an oft-made assertion these days, an assertion that poses as an argument but without evidence to back it up.  

Liam has learned a bit early about courage and what’s at stake when you stand for what is true. Pray for him. It’s not easy to be accused of evil, but more Christians will be.

Copyright 2024 by the Colson Center for Christian Worldview. Reprinted from BreakPoint.org with permission.