Debanking Isn’t Rare: ADF Attorney

Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Jeremy Tedesco recently took to social media to explain that debanking is not “rare” in America.

His comments come as Reuters and other media outlets seem to be trying to whitewash debanking or dismiss it altogether.

Since 2021, congressional testimony and news stories have highlighted how federal officials and financial institutions targeted conservative organizations through “reputational risk” policies. Conservatives deemed “high risk” could have their bank accounts closed without warning and without explanation.

During the Biden Administration, the federal Treasury Department gave banks and financial institutions an analysis titled “Bankrolling Bigotry” 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.

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.”

We also now know the U.S. Treasury Department gave banks and other financial institutions guiding “typologies” — patterns they could use to identify suspicious people or activities — the included search terms and patterns like “TRUMP” and “MAGA.”

The department 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.”

These problems went largely unreported until congress began asking serious questions about debanking.

But as of today, corporate shareholdersstate attorneys generalcongressmenfederal investigators, and news outlets all have expressed concerns over conservatives being wrongly labeled as “high risk” or “hate groups” and subsequently debanked.

Jeremy Tedesco is an attorney who serves as Alliance Defending Freedom’s Senior Counsel and Senior Vice President of Corporate Engagement. In a statement issued on X, Tedesco called debanking a “silenced” problem, writing,

Debanking is severely under-reported. Most victims I’ve spoken to won’t go public—fear of the stigma and of losing access to their money is that real. . . .The corporate media’s framing of debanking as “rare” is wrong and misleading. Victims rarely file formal complaints—most are too afraid of being shut out completely.

We can say from experience that Mr. Tedesco is exactly right.

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. The company never explained why were labeled “high risk.” All we could do was speculate that our conservative principles and our public policy work might have had something to do with the decision.

Filing a consumer complaint or going to court seemed pointless at the time, because the processor’s Terms of Service said it could terminate our account for any reason or no reason at all. Apparently that’s what they decided to do to us.

In 2022, Chase abruptly closed the account of Ambassador Sam Brownback’s National Committee for Religious Freedom with little warning or explanation, and PayPal similarly disabled the account of a group called the Free Speech Union.

Stories like these are part of the reason President Trump recently signed an executive order against debanking. The purpose of the order is to guarantee fair banking for all Americans.

To their credit, JPMorgan Chase has taken steps to prevent religiously-motivated debanking, and Bank of America has finally done the same. That’s a good thing.

We appreciate groups like Alliance Defending Freedom who have worked so hard to fight against debanking. After all, banks that are too big to fail are too big to discriminate.

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

Family Council Joins Amicus Brief Urging SCOTUS to Address School Gender Transition Case

On Thursday, Family Council joined an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a case over a Massachusetts school that helped an eleven-year old girl “socially transition” genders without her parents’ knowledge.

Our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom have discuss this case repeatedly, writing,

During the 2020-21 school year, a 6th-grade girl in Ludlow, Massachusetts, shared with a teacher that she had told a friend she ‘likes girls,’ was experiencing low self-esteem and depression, and needed help. The teacher shared these concerns with the girl’s mother, and both agreed to work together to help her. The student’s parents promptly got their daughter a therapist, informed the school she was getting professional help, and expressly directed school staff to have no further private conversations with their daughter about her mental health issues. But when the student sent an email to teachers and counselors informing them that she now identified as “genderqueer” and wanted to be addressed by a new name and a new list of pronouns, they began doing so without informing the student’s parents or asking for their consent. The parents found out and asked the district to stop, but it refused. The parents filed a lawsuit challenging the school district’s clear violation of their parental rights, and Alliance Defending Freedom filed an amicus brief in their support at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit. Unfortunately, the 1st Circuit failed to protect parental rights.

Family Council joined a coalition of 50 organizations in an amicus brief by Advancing American Freedom on Thursday. The brief urges the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the parents’ lawsuit against the school.

The brief also argues that parental rights are essential and that schools should respect them.

Over the years, we have seen pro-LGBT activists use public schools to promote transgender ideology to kids in many different ways — but policymakers have pushed back.

In 2021 Arkansas passed Act 461 to prevent male athletes from competing against girls in women’s athletics at school. This good law protects fairness in women’s sports in Arkansas.

That same year, lawmakers passed the Save Adolescents from Experimentation (SAFE) Act generally prohibiting doctors from performing sex-change procedures on children or giving them puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones. That law has since been upheld in federal court.

In 2023, Arkansas lawmakers passed Act 317 to protect privacy in public school locker rooms, showers, restrooms, changing areas, and similar facilities by requiring public schools to designate these facilities for “male” or “female” use.

Legislators also passed Act 274 of 2023 letting a child who undergoes a sex-change procedure sue the healthcare provider who performed the procedure if the child suffers any injury as a result.

In 2023, the Arkansas Legislature passed the LEARNS Act overhauling public education in Arkansas, prohibiting critical race theory in public schools, and protecting young elementary school children from inappropriate sexual material in the classroom.

This year legislators passed Act 955 by Sen. Blake Johnson (R — Corning) and Rep. Mary Bentley (R — Perryville) protecting physical privacy and safety of Arkansans in showers, locker rooms, changing rooms, restrooms, and sleeping quarters in government buildings, jails, and in shelters for victims of domestic violence.

Taken together, all of these good laws protect children at school and elsewhere around the state. Public school students should not be taught to question their sexual-orientation or their gender, and schools should not lie to parents about what their children are learning at school.

Family Council is pleased to take a stand for parental rights in federal court. We hope the U.S. Supreme Court will take up this case.

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

8th Circuit Bolsters Free Speech for All

The following press release is from our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom:

The following quote may be attributed to Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Tyson Langhofer, director of the ADF Center for Academic Freedom, regarding a decision Wednesday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit in Melton v. City of Forrest City, a case concerning a firefighter who had his employment terminated after he posted a pro-life image on social media, ruling that the firefighter’s free-speech claim should go to a jury:

“All Americans should be free to express viewpoints and ideas without fear of government punishment. When the government decides which topics are appropriate for debate, we all lose. The 8th Circuit rightly recognized that the First Amendment’s bar on heckler’s vetoes protects the full-bodied discussions necessary for public debate. Governments can’t monopolize the marketplace of ideas, otherwise organizations like The Douglass Leadership Institute, The Radiance Foundation, and Speak for Life, which stand for life—especially in Black communities that are disproportionately affected by abortion—wouldn’t be free to speak without fear of government reprisal. The court’s decision allows free speech to flourish for all.”

“The problem is that there was no showing that Melton’s post had an impact on the fire department itself,” the 8th Circuit wrote in its ruling. “No current firefighter complained or confronted him about it. Nor did any co-worker or supervisor refuse to work with him. Granting summary judgment based on such ‘vague and conclusory’ concerns, without more, runs the risk of constitutionalizing a heckler’s veto.”

In February 2024, ADF attorneys filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case on behalf of The Douglass Leadership Institute, The Radiance Foundation, and Speak for Life.

  • Pronunciation guide: Langhofer (LANG’-hoff-ur)

Alliance Defending Freedom is an alliance-building, non-profit legal organization committed to protecting religious freedom, free speech, parental rights, and the sanctity of life.

# # #