Blab Politics
U.S. Attorney Subpoenas Major Banks in Probe of Alleged Politically Motivated Debanking
Jeanine Pirro, the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, sent subpoenas in early June 2026 to several large banks, including Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase. The requests demand that the institutions turn over lists of customers whose accounts were closed, the dates of those closures, and the reasons cited for each action.
The investigation centers on the practice known in banking circles as “debanking”—the abrupt termination of an account when a bank believes the holder poses a legal, regulatory, or reputational risk. According to reports, the subpoenas seek to determine whether any political motives influenced these decisions.
Both Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase have publicly denied that political or religious factors drive their account‑closure policies. In a statement issued in January 2026, JPMorgan reiterated that it does not shut down accounts for such reasons, adding that closures occur only when the holder creates legal or regulatory risk. The banks have indicated that they will comply with the subpoenas, though no detailed responses have yet been released.
The probe comes against a backdrop of high‑profile disputes between former President Donald Trump and major financial institutions. In April 2025, Trump filed a $5 billion lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase and CEO Jamie Dimon, alleging that the bank had “debanked” him in retaliation for his criticism of the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack. JPMorgan dismissed the claim as “without merit.” Trump also sued Capital One, accusing the bank of terminating more than 300 of his organization’s accounts in 2021.
In August 2025, President Trump signed an executive order aimed at curbing what he described as “politicized or unlawful debanking” by major banks. The order stresses that banking services should be based on “material, measurable, and justifiable risks.”
When The Independent reached out for comment, the U.S. Attorney’s office declined to speak. Bank officials have not yet issued statements regarding the subpoenas, and their legal teams are reportedly preparing their responses.
The investigation is part of a broader scrutiny of banking practices that has intensified in recent years. While the subpoenas do not yet indicate whether any unlawful activity has occurred, they signal that federal prosecutors are examining whether account‑closure decisions may have been swayed by political considerations.
No definitive outcome has emerged. The banks are expected to provide the requested information in the coming weeks, after which the U.S. Attorney’s office may hold hearings to review the responses. Until the subpoenas are answered and any potential evidence is examined, the allegations remain unverified.
At present, the investigation is ongoing and no new legal actions have been announced. The banks’ compliance with the subpoenas and any subsequent findings by the U.S. Attorney’s office will determine whether further regulatory or civil proceedings are warranted.
The situation remains fluid, with the federal investigation continuing to unfold as the banks submit their records and the U.S. Attorney’s office reviews the information. The outcome will have implications for banking regulation and the broader debate over the role of political considerations in financial services.
The investigation centers on the practice known in banking circles as “debanking”—the abrupt termination of an account when a bank believes the holder poses a legal, regulatory, or reputational risk. According to reports, the subpoenas seek to determine whether any political motives influenced these decisions.
Both Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase have publicly denied that political or religious factors drive their account‑closure policies. In a statement issued in January 2026, JPMorgan reiterated that it does not shut down accounts for such reasons, adding that closures occur only when the holder creates legal or regulatory risk. The banks have indicated that they will comply with the subpoenas, though no detailed responses have yet been released.
The probe comes against a backdrop of high‑profile disputes between former President Donald Trump and major financial institutions. In April 2025, Trump filed a $5 billion lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase and CEO Jamie Dimon, alleging that the bank had “debanked” him in retaliation for his criticism of the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack. JPMorgan dismissed the claim as “without merit.” Trump also sued Capital One, accusing the bank of terminating more than 300 of his organization’s accounts in 2021.
In August 2025, President Trump signed an executive order aimed at curbing what he described as “politicized or unlawful debanking” by major banks. The order stresses that banking services should be based on “material, measurable, and justifiable risks.”
When The Independent reached out for comment, the U.S. Attorney’s office declined to speak. Bank officials have not yet issued statements regarding the subpoenas, and their legal teams are reportedly preparing their responses.
The investigation is part of a broader scrutiny of banking practices that has intensified in recent years. While the subpoenas do not yet indicate whether any unlawful activity has occurred, they signal that federal prosecutors are examining whether account‑closure decisions may have been swayed by political considerations.
No definitive outcome has emerged. The banks are expected to provide the requested information in the coming weeks, after which the U.S. Attorney’s office may hold hearings to review the responses. Until the subpoenas are answered and any potential evidence is examined, the allegations remain unverified.
At present, the investigation is ongoing and no new legal actions have been announced. The banks’ compliance with the subpoenas and any subsequent findings by the U.S. Attorney’s office will determine whether further regulatory or civil proceedings are warranted.
The situation remains fluid, with the federal investigation continuing to unfold as the banks submit their records and the U.S. Attorney’s office reviews the information. The outcome will have implications for banking regulation and the broader debate over the role of political considerations in financial services.
