Major Banks Closed Accounts for Conservatives, Pro-Lifers: New Federal Report

A landmark federal report shows that America’s largest banks closed accounts belonging to Christians, pro-lifers, and other conservatives during the Biden administration. Officials say they plan to investigate whether the institutions broke any consumer protection laws.

Individuals and organizations rely on banks and other financial institutions every day, and they expect these institutions to serve everyone regardless of their religious convictions or political positions. But over the past five years, congressional testimony and news stories have highlighted how federal officials and financial institutions targeted conservative organizations through debanking. Conservatives deemed “high risk” could have their bank accounts closed without warning and without explanation.

Late last year, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued a preliminary report confirming that America’s nine largest banks systematically debanked customers over their political beliefs. On Wednesday, the OCC released a much more comprehensive report, Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans. The report provides examples of real people who were debanked for their political positions and religious convictions.

The report focuses on debanking activity by JPMorgan Chase Bank, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo Bank, U.S. Bank, Capital One, PNC Bank, TD Bank, and BMO Bank.

In a statement, the OCC said:

“The OCC conducted its supervisory review in accordance with the President’s Executive Order, ‘Guaranteeing Fair Access to Banking for All Americans,’ to determine whether these banks’ policies or practices may have required, encouraged, or otherwise influenced banks to deny or limit access to financial services to Americans because of their political or religious beliefs or lawful business activities. The OCC’s findings show that, between 2020 and September 2025, all nine banks had such policies. …

“In the report, the OCC found that broad reputation risk policies—which lacked clear standards and objective, risk-based criteria—disadvantaged certain Americans based on their political, religious, or social views or based on their lawful business activities. The OCC also found that banks maintained public and nonpublic policies restricting certain industry sectors’ access to financial services, including those in oil and gas exploration, coal mining or coal-powered plants, firearms or ammunition manufacturing or distribution, construction or operation of detention facilities, the manufacturing, distribution or online retail of tobacco or e-cigarettes, and digital asset activities.”

The report reveals that debanking has been widespread:

“JPMorgan’s subsidiary, WePay, Inc. (WePay), terminated accounts for several political or religious leaning merchants. …

“In February 2021, WePay closed the account of a merchant that sold merchandise promoting President Trump and the Make America Great Again (MAGA) brand. WePay determined that the merchant’s merchandise ‘promote[d] hate, violence, or racial intolerance.’ Following the account closure, one employee reported ‘we closed their account due to violating our WePay’s Terms of Services (MAGA and Trump-related items are part of it).’ This employee seems to have been referring to the inclusion of terms like MAGA on the list of search terms discussed above. Although JPMorgan employees did not provide input on the account closure decision, the basis for the decision was explained to bank employees shortly thereafter.

“In June 2021, WePay closed the account of a customer that employees characterized in the bank’s internal tracking system as a ‘[r]ight wing religious conservative non profit with strong anti LGBTQ rhetoric.’ WePay escalated the matter to JPMorgan reputation risk employees. The escalation discussed recent negative media linked to the merchant’s position on hate crime legislation and the Southern Poverty Law Center’s categorization of the organization as an ‘extremist hate group.’ WePay had maintained an account for the merchant since 2019, and there was no evidence to suggest the merchant’s views changed during that time. JPMorgan reputation risk employees advised WePay that ‘from a Reputation Risk perspective, we would recommend an exit from this account.’ In 2023, a reputation risk employee at the bank subsequently removed references in the internal bank tracking system to the nonprofit organization being ‘right wing’ and ‘religious.’ Instead, the employee described the organization as ‘a conservative education and research organization based in [redacted]. Their mission is promoting, protecting, and strengthening traditional family values, which include pro-life, pro-marriage and pro-family.’

“In July 2021, WePay closed an account used to raise funds to support a legal challenge by a ‘devout Christian’ of certain anti-discrimination laws. WePay escalated the matter to JPMorgan reputation risk employees prior to closing the account.”

In a separate statement, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said it plans to investigate whether any of the banks named in the OCC report broke the law:

“‘It is appalling that these banks targeted American consumers for their political, social, or religious beliefs that did not align with the Biden Administration or its leftist allies. Many of those targeted were supporters of President Trump. These thuggish tactics, which were also a defining feature of the Biden-Chopra CFPB, have no place in America,’ said CFPB’s Acting Director Mark Paoletta. ‘We thank the Department of the Treasury and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency for conducting its review to shed light on these shameful practices. The CFPB will fully investigate whether the institutions featured in OCC’s report and others have complied with federal consumer financial laws and take appropriate action.’

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel and Senior Vice President of the Counter Censorship Task Force Jeremy Tedesco praised the report, saying:

“No one should be denied access to basic financial services because of their political or religious beliefs. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency just issued a landmark report, however, revealing how big banks have discriminated against Christians and other mainstream conservatives specifically for their religious and political views. The report detailed how big banks have used vague ‘reputational risk’ standards to punish and cancel accounts of faith-based nonprofits like ADF client Indigenous Advance. As the report made clear, debanking inflicts ‘real-world harm to customers and prospective customers’ like Indigenous Advance, whose Ugandan employees were forced to wait on delayed paychecks because of Bank of America’s decision to abruptly cancel the nonprofit’s accounts.

“This rampant abuse on the part of financial institutions would be alarming enough on its own, but it gets worse. The report also highlights the widespread influence played by far-left groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has recently been indicted on multiple counts, including on three counts of making false statements to a federally insured bank and one count of money laundering.

“ADF has been deeply concerned about the rise of politicized debanking for years and has worked diligently to combat this unlawful behavior at every turn, including partnering with state legislators and federal officials to secure the fundamental freedoms of every American. The OCC’s report underscores how states like Tennessee, Idaho, and South Carolina, which have all enacted laws to protect their citizens against discriminatory debanking, have ‘likely acted as a catalyst for changes in many banks.’ ADF commends the OCC and Trump administration for bringing this threat to light and acting decisively to bring meaningful change, and urges lawmakers in other states, and in Congress, to follow their lead.”

In 2021, Family Council’s credit card processor WePay — a company owned by JPMorgan Chase — 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 WePay 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 60 seconds, Family Council could no longer accept donations online. The processor never explained why we were labeled “high risk.” All we could 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, this was not an isolated incident. As the OCC report illustrates, many other organizations had similar experiences.

Family Council is grateful to the many people and organizations who have stood up against debanking in recent years. After all, banks that are too big to fail are also too big to discriminate.

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

Released Time for Religious Instruction Expanding in Other States

Recent news reports highlight how more and more, public school students in other states are able to leave campus during the day for religious instruction — something commonly known as “released time.”

Released time makes it possible for students to be excused from school so they can attend Bible studies or other religious classes during normal school hours. Thanks to federal court rulings, released time programs have been in operation for decades — and in some states it’s growing.

Earlier this year, our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) reported that Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed a bill into law that formally recognizes released time programs. The law outlines how parents may have their children briefly excused from school during the day to receive free religious instruction off-campus. Last month, the Alabama Daily News highlighted how released time in the state has expanded since the law’s passage.

In August, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported that released time growing in Arkansas’ public schools as well.

Arkansas does not have a state law outlining how released time works, but released programs operate in the state under federal court rulings. Generally speaking, released time in Arkansas requires three components:

  1. A church or other organization that wants to fund and conduct a released time program off-campus.
  2. School board approval for a policy authorizing students to leave campus for released time during school hours.
  3. Parental consent for the student to participate in the program.

Once a church or other group properly plans and prepares to operate a released time program, they can go to the local school board to seek approval and then collaborate with the school district to set the best time in the day for a released time program.

As long as the program meets off-campus, obtains parental consent, and is privately funded, then the school board may authorize the program.

The private entity that oversees the released time program is encouraged to work with the local school district and school board to set up a mutually agreeable schedule that benefits students. If planned correctly, released time programs generally do not conflict with a student’s core courses like math or English.

In June, the organization LifeWise Academy shared ways it is expanding released time opportunities for students in Arkansas.

LifeWise serves more than 1,200 students at approximately a dozen locations across the state. The program is expected to continue to grow in the coming year.

Family Council hopes to work with state and local policymakers in the future to promote released time programs and help pass a law formally recognizing released time in Arkansas.

If you are interested in starting a released time program in your community, you are welcome to contact our office at 501-375-7000 for more information.

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

Oregon Homeschool Mom Sues for Religious Discrimination

Tessa Bulzan, a Christian mother of five who homeschools her two oldest children in Oregon, is suing the Hillsboro School District for discriminating against her choice to use religious educational materials for her children.

Tessa Bulzan, a Christian homeschool mom in Oregon, recently filed a lawsuit after public school officials denied her reimbursement for religious curriculum.

Homeschoolers in Oregon are eligible for reimbursements for educational expenses. Similar programs operate in other states around the country — including Arkansas, where homeschoolers may receive funding via Educational Freedom Accounts.

But in Oregon, public school officials have apparently provided reimbursements for secular curricula while refusing to reimburse for religious curricula. Attorneys at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) write:

“Tessa Bulzan homeschools her children because she believes that God calls her to do so, instilling her faith in her children through her chosen homeschooling materials and curricula.

“Hillsboro School District offers a Homeschooling Partnership that reimburses parents for educational materials the parents choose and offers in-person learning opportunities to supplement home instruction. The program’s representative told Bulzan that she could use any curriculum, including a religious one, so she chose a combination of Abeka and Classical Conversations for her homeschooled instruction and enrolled her children in classes through the Firmly Planted Hillsboro co-op. All three provide God-centered academic instruction.

“After enrollment, the school district had very little interaction with Bulzan, providing virtually no oversight for her instruction. When the homeschooled mother went to submit her expenses for reimbursement at the end of the first semester, however, district employees denied reimbursing any of the Abeka or Classical Conversation costs and any of the Firmly Planted Hillsboro co-op fees ‘due to the Christian and biblical worldview that is taught’ and the ‘Christian beliefs and themes [that] are integrated throughout core subject areas.'”

ADF says Bulzan appealed the denial, but the school district still refused. Finally, she filed a lawsuit against the district with help from ADF.

To put it plainly, public officials cannot exclude religious people or religious groups from government programs.

In 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional to withhold public benefits to a person or group because they are religious.

The lawsuit against Oregon’s Hillsboro School District makes this point very clearly.

Arkansas has enacted good laws over the years like the Religious Freedom Restoration Act that stop the government from discriminating against people because of their religious convictions. Laws like it should help prevent cases like the one in Oregon from happening here.

We appreciate our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom standing up for religious liberty and defending homeschoolers in court.

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