Religious liberty advocates caution Tennessee lawmakers on risks of politically driven ‘de-banking
Tennessee Lawmakers Hear Testimonies of Religious Groups Losing Bank Accounts
In a compelling hearing, Tennessee lawmakers were presented with accounts from religious groups who believe they lost access to their bank accounts due to ideological reasons.
Unjust De-Banking
One such group, the National Committee for Religious Freedom, had recently opened an account with JPMorgan Chase. However, their account mysteriously vanished when the organization’s head, former Kansas Governor Sam Brownback, attempted to make a deposit. Despite being informed that they had missed a paperwork deadline, the account was terminated after only three weeks, leaving the group suspicious of de-banking, a practice where individuals are denied financial services due to their beliefs.
During the hearing, the National Committee for Religious Freedom joined other groups in supporting a proposed Tennessee bill that aims to prevent banks from discriminating against individuals based on their political or religious views. The group testified before the Tennessee House of Representatives’ Subcommittee on Banking and Consumer Affairs, emphasizing the urgency of the issue.
Championing Religious Liberty
Matt Goddard, senior advisor of the National Committee for Religious Freedom, expressed their concerns during a press conference after the hearing. He highlighted the importance of their cause, stating, “If Sam Brownback can be de-banked by Chase Bank, anyone can be de-banked by Chase Bank.”
The proposed bill, HB2100, seeks to prevent financial institutions and insurance companies from denying or canceling services based on speech, opinions, affiliations, or religious beliefs. It aims to amend Tennessee’s consumer protection laws without affecting existing quantitative factors considered by banks.
The issue of de-banking gained attention in recent years, with incidents such as Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau freezing the bank accounts of protesting truckers and banks being asked to flag transactions of Trump supporters and customers of outdoor stores.
Impacted Missions
Another case highlighted during the hearing was that of Indigenous Advance Ministries, a Memphis-based Christian nonprofit aiding the impoverished in Uganda. Bank of America closed their account, citing a misalignment with the bank’s risk tolerance. This sudden closure greatly affected the organization’s mission, as they had been a customer for eight years.
Sponsored by Rep. Jason Zachary (R-Knoxville) and Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson (R-Franklin), the Tennessee bill also aims to prohibit banks from maintaining a social credit score based on factors such as gun ownership, employment in the firearm, oil, or timber industries, or support for immigration law enforcement.
Protecting Tennesseans
Rep. Zachary emphasized that the legislation is a consumer protection act, safeguarding Tennesseans from being de-banked for non-financial reasons. The insurance component of the bill aims to proactively prevent discrimination based on political speech or religious belief.
Opposing the bill, the Tennessee Bankers Association argued that it addresses a non-existent problem, asserting that federal discrimination laws already protect consumers.
The House committee did not have enough time to vote on advancing the bill but is expected to do so next week. Similar measures have been proposed in Florida and Iowa to protect consumers from financial discrimination.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP
In what ways did Operation Choke Point in the United States violate free speech and religious liberty rights, and what impact did it have on high-risk businesses?
Ter Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party being accused of targeting conservative groups through the Canada Summer Jobs program. In the United States, the Obama administration was also criticized for Operation Choke Point, a program that aimed to shut down access to financial services for businesses that were considered high-risk. Critics argued that these initiatives violated free speech and religious liberty rights.
The case of the National Committee for Religious Freedom is just one example of religious groups facing barriers when it comes to accessing financial services. Proponents of the proposed Tennessee bill argue that banks should not have the power to determine who can have access to financial services based on ideological grounds. They believe that such practices not only infringe on religious liberty but also stifle the free exchange of ideas and the diversity of viewpoints in society.
Opponents of the bill, on the other hand, argue that financial institutions should have the right to choose whom they do business with. They claim that banks should be able to evaluate the risk associated with certain individuals or groups and make decisions based on that assessment. Critics worry that the bill could potentially undermine the ability of financial institutions to protect themselves from fraudulent activities or illegal transactions. They also argue that the proposed legislation could lead to unintended consequences and create loopholes that could be exploited by bad actors.
The Tennessee House of Representatives’ Subcommittee on Banking and Consumer Affairs must carefully consider these arguments as they deliberate on the proposed bill. They must weigh the importance of protecting free speech and religious liberty against the need to ensure the integrity and security of the financial system. Striking a balance that safeguards both individual rights and the stability of financial institutions is a complex task, but it is crucial to create a fair and inclusive banking environment.
As the discussions continue, it is essential to remember the fundamental principles that underpin a democratic society. Preserving the rights of individuals to hold and express their beliefs, whether religious or political, is central to maintaining a diverse, tolerant, and democratic society. While financial institutions have the right to protect themselves, they must do so without unduly encroaching on the rights of individuals or discriminating against them based on their beliefs.
The hearing on the proposed Tennessee bill has provided an opportunity to shed light on the issue of de-banking and religious discrimination, prompting a crucial conversation about the balance between individual freedoms and the responsibilities of financial institutions. The outcome of this debate will not only affect religious groups in Tennessee but will also set a precedent for similar discussions nationwide. It is a decision that will shape the landscape of religious freedom and political expression for years to come.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...