Featured Image
WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 22: JPMorgan Chase & Co CEO Jamie Dimon testifies during a Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee hearing on Capitol Hill September 22, 2022 in Washington, DC. Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Editor’s note: This article was updated at 4:21 p.m. ET on May 9 to include a response by a Chase spokeswoman who replied to LifeSite’s request for comment after initial publication.

NEW YORK (LifeSiteNews) — JP Morgan Chase “persistently discriminated” on the basis of religious and political beliefs, 19 Republican attorneys general said in a recent letter.

The letter came after allegations that the banking giant, which recently bought failed First Republican bank, shut down the account of the National Committee for Religious Freedom, led by former Ambassador-at-Large for Religious Freedom Sam Brownback.

It also cited Chase company WePay’s initial decision to refuse to process payments for an event with Donald Trump Jr. until Missouri’s state treasurer intervened.

While the company claims it opposes all forms of discrimination, this does not extend to conservative-leaning groups, the attorneys general alleged.

They wrote:

Chase has not extended its openness and inclusivity to everyone. Last year, Chase de-banked a preeminent religious liberty organization. And this was not an anomaly, as there have been at least two other similar incidents. Shareholders and outside groups alike responded by requesting that Chase disclose its policies for closing accounts and that it participate in the survey component of [Alliance Defending Freedom’s] … Viewpoint Diversity Score Business Index. Chase has opposed both of these requests. Meanwhile, Chase celebrates its participation in the survey component of the Corporate Equality Index sponsored by the left-wing Human Rights Campaign. Quite simply, this viewpoint discrimination demonstrates that Chase is not the “inclusive” company it claims to be. Nor is it one that “opposes discrimination in any form.”

The letter cited a decision by a Chase credit card process to shut down the account of Family Council, “a conservative, pro-life organization.”

The company has also opposed efforts to clearly “demonstrate” its “declared commitment to openness and inclusivity.”

“The National Center for Public Policy Research (the Center) recently led a shareholder proposal calling on Chase to disclose its policies for closing accounts” and “disclose a report on the risks created by Company business practices that prioritize non-pecuniary factors when it comes to establishing, rejecting, or failing to continue client relationships.”

However, the company rejected this request.

Furthermore, Chase’s results on ADF’s viewpoint index “revealed that the bank has unclear or imprecise policies that allow it to deny service for arbitrary or politically biased reasons.” However the company, while rejecting ADF’s request for clarity, openly participated in the Human Rights Campaign’s survey. HRC is a far-left pro-LGBT lobby group.

“No individual or organization should have to worry that religious or political beliefs will limit access to financial services or undermine financial stability,” the letter stated. “Surely Chase’s promised inclusivity should extend to these fundamental characteristics of American identity.”

The attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia signed the letter.

LifeSiteNews contacted Chase’s media team to ask for comment on the letter and if the company had any plans to investigate the allegations. Corporate media representative Trish Wexler, corporate responsibility spokesman Steve O’Halloran, and diversity, equity and inclusion spokeswoman Allison Kahn all did not respond to the Monday morning email.

On Tuesday, one day after this article’s initial publication, Wexler did respond to LifeSiteNews’ request for comment and denied the allegations.

“We have never and would never exit a client relationship due to their political or religious affiliation,” Wexler said. “We proudly serve 50,000+ religious nonprofits throughout the country, among our more than 50 million households and 4+ million small business clients. These allegations are inconsistent with our business model that serves Americans in all 50 states, of all political stripes and religions.”

This is not the first time that financial giants have attempted to use their power against conservatives. Credit card companies Visa, Mastercard, and American Express, following pressure from a union-owned bank, started tracking gun store purchases until pushback from Republican states led Visa and Mastercard to put the initiative on hold.

“If we come to the legislative session and companies like Visa, Mastercard and American Express are generating these reports to create a chilling effect against the purchase of firearms, then I’ll work with the Legislature to pass a law penalizing businesses who are targeting the right to bear arm,” Florida’s Chief Financial Officer Jimmy Patronis said in September 2022.

The attorneys general of 24 states also demanded that Visa, Mastercard, and American Express rescind their decision to track gun store purchases following pressure from leftist activists and politicians.

“Recently, the [International Organization for Standardization] voted to create a Merchant Category Code for gun stores to use when processing credit and debit card transactions,” the attorneys general wrote in September 2022. “The move was prompted by years of pressure from ideologues and accomplished via an application by the union-owned Amalgamated Bank. Troublingly, some of you have already begun implementing this new policy.”

New York City Mayor Eric Adams, for example, thanked the financial institutions for heeding his call and that of some government agencies to track gun store purchases, as LifeSiteNews previously reported. City pension funds used their ownership in stocks in those companies to agitate for the new regulations.

Conservatives were wary the move could be used to create a backdoor national gun registry for the federal government.