The US Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeanine Pirro, has launched a sweeping investigation into whether major banks closed customer accounts for political reasons, issuing subpoenas to Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase, among others. The probe, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, demands that the banks disclose which customers were debanked and the rationale behind those decisions. This marks a significant escalation of a long-running grievance voiced by former President Donald Trump, who has accused financial institutions of discriminating against conservative-leaning clients and whose own accounts were closed by JPMorgan after the January 6 Capitol riots.

Viewed from Washington, the investigation aligns with Trump’s broader campaign against what he calls the 'debanking' of political opponents. In August 2024, Trump signed an executive order directing regulators to examine whether banks violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act by closing accounts based on political affiliation. The Treasury Department’s Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is also conducting a parallel probe. Critics, however, argue that the investigation risks politicising banking regulations and could chill legitimate risk-management practices, as banks often close accounts due to compliance concerns or financial irregularities rather than political bias.

Analysts in London note that the case underscores a growing transatlantic debate over the role of financial institutions in policing political speech. While US banks face pressure from both conservative activists and progressive campaigns to sever ties with controversial clients, European regulators have generally taken a more hands-off approach, viewing account closures as commercial decisions. The outcome of Pirro’s investigation could set a precedent for how aggressively governments intervene in banking practices, potentially reshaping the relationship between lenders and their customers in an era of heightened political polarisation.

Looking ahead, the subpoenas are likely to intensify scrutiny of the banking sector’s internal policies and could lead to legislative action if evidence of systematic political discrimination emerges. For now, the banks have declined to comment, but the investigation places them in a delicate position: they must balance compliance with anti-money laundering rules against the risk of being seen as partisan actors. As the probe unfolds, it will test the boundaries of financial regulation and the extent to which political considerations can—or should—influence commercial decisions.