Tuesday, August 29, 2023

Did Banks Hand Private Financial Data to the FBI Without Legal Process?

The House Judiciary Committee is investigating banks for sharing Americans' financial information with the FBI without regard for privacy concerns.

"Today, Chairman Jim Jordan subpoenaed Citibank for documents and communications related to the Judiciary Committee's and Weaponization Select Subcommittee's investigation into major banks sharing Americans' private financial data with the Federal Bureau of Investigation without legal process for transactions made in the Washington, D.C., area around Jan. 6, 2021," the House Judiciary Committee announced August 17.

The subpoena followed June 12 queries to Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase & Company, PNC Financial Services, Truist, U.S. Bankcorp, and Wells Fargo after testimony by FBI whistleblowers that Bank of America voluntarily handed the FBI records on people who had used its services in the Washington, D.C. area around the time of the January 6 Capitol riot.

If the banks in question surrendered private financial information to federal officials based on little more than "Please," that's disturbing.

"The mission of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is to safeguard the financial system from illicit use, combat money laundering and its related crimes including terrorism, and promote national security through the strategic use of financial authorities and the collection, analysis, and dissemination of financial intelligence," boasts the federal agency, which operates under the umbrella of the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

To that end, it administers a host of rules including customer due diligence mandating that banks "Identify and verify the identity of customers," larger "Know your customer" rules specifying that financial institutions profile clients once they're identified, the misnamed Bank Secrecy Act which requires "Financial institutions to, among other things, keep records of cash purchases of negotiable instruments, file reports of cash transactions exceeding $10,000," and suspicious activity reports which banks must file on "Suspicious or potentially illicit activity."

Did the FBI squeeze banks for information on people who were present in Washington, D.C. on the day of a riot, without providing evidence that they participated in the violence or even went near the related and perfectly legal election protests? That would certainly be a dangerous escalation in the abuse of government officials' leverage over the financial industry. 

https://reason.com/2023/08/28/did-banks-hand-private-financial-date-to-the-fbi-without-legal-process/

No comments: