Proverbs 20:23 says, “The Lord detests double standards. He is not pleased by dishonest scales.” The Bible has much to say about economic honesty and the government’s responsibility to uphold just standards. That’s why I welcome this week’s report from the office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), one of America’s principal banking regulators.
The report, “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans,” found that the nation’s nine largest banks maintained policies that restricted banking services based on customers’ religious or political beliefs. In other words, Americans could be debanked because of what they believed.
Family Research Council was among the organizations affected. Banks frequently justified such decisions by citing reputational risk. Apparently, doing business with pro-life organizations or religious groups that believe marriage is between a man and a woman was considered a threat to their reputation.
These practices just happened to overlap with the Biden administration, which also pressured social media platforms to cancel critics of the administration. Was this simply ideological conformity in corporate America, or did government pressure play a role? That question deserves investigation. And guess whose name surfaced in the report? The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).
Banks referenced the SPLC’s “hate group” designations in assessing customers. Earlier this year, I testified before the House Judiciary Committee about the SPLC’s efforts to pressure financial institutions to debank Christian and conservative organizations. Now, federal regulators have documented how the banks willingly complied with the SPLC.
But here’s where the story takes an extraordinary turn.
Just one day before the OCC released its report, the Treasury Department announced $1.2 billion in penalties against Bank of America, the third-largest penalty in Treasury Department history. The bank failed to properly monitor and report more than $5 billion in suspicious financial activity, including transactions that raised serious money laundering concerns. Regulators described their compliance program as deficient and ineffective.
Think about that. Some of the country’s largest banks scrutinized lawful Americans for their religious and political beliefs, while some failed to monitor billions of dollars in potentially illicit transactions — which was required to be monitored by law. That’s quite a double standard.
Now, these are separate regulatory findings. They don’t prove the bank neglected financial crime because it was focused on conservative customers. But together, they raise a fundamental question about institutional priorities. Banks should be concerned about their reputations — but reputations are built on integrity, not ideological conformity. If these institutions want to protect their reputations, they should spend less time policing the beliefs of law-abiding Americans and more time policing the financial activity they’re legally obligated to monitor.
Government regulators must also ensure lawful consumers are treated fairly, regardless of their convictions.
Scripture tells us the Lord detests dishonest scales. Americans should reject a banking system that holds its customers to one standard and itself to another. I want a bank that will safeguard my money, not weigh my religious beliefs on a biased scale.
