What May Be Ahead In Debanking Enforcement

President Donald Trump's Executive Order No. 14331 on politicized or unlawful debanking, issued on Aug. 7, has spurred a flurry of activity by the federal banking regulators over the past few months.

For example, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Small Business Administration have both publicly taken steps to effectuate Trump's order. Other federal financial regulators, like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, have also begun efforts to identify potential current and historical politicized or unlawful debanking practices in less public ways.

To be sure, additional debanking-related activity is likely on the horizon, and banks and financial institutions should be prepared for the issue to remain at the forefront of their regulators' minds for the foreseeable future.

Debanking-Related Consumer Complaints

One of the longer-term requirements from the executive order is for the federal banking regulators to "review their current supervisory and complaint data to identify any financial institution that has engaged in unlawful debanking on the basis of religion" within 180 days of Aug. 7. Banks should, therefore, conduct their own reviews of prior complaints to get ahead of inquiries and possible scrutiny regarding debanking-related complaints that may have been submitted in the recent past.

Some complaint data, such as data regarding complaints submitted through the CFPB's complaint portal, is publicly available and can shed light on areas of potential concern and perhaps on the type of data that banks and other financial institutions may have internally.

As of Nov. 4, a search of the CFPB's database for the word "debank" yielded 26 complaints where the consumer elected to have their complaint narrative be publicly viewable and the narrative contains some variation of the word "debank." These complaints were submitted between May 2024 and October 2025 and were directed at a variety of banks and nonbank financial institutions. Twenty-three of the 26 complaints were marked as being closed with explanation, with the remaining three being closed with nonmonetary relief.

Similarly, searching for the word "religion," then narrowing the results down to issues and subissues related to the opening and closing of accounts, also yields numerous instances where a consumer alleges being discriminated against in connection with a financial service or product. These are the types of complaints that are likely to become the focus of federal banking regulators in the near future as they comply with Trump's executive order, and so, banks and other financial institutions would be well-served to get ahead of this now.

Banks should also expect that the frequency with which consumers submit debanking-related complaints is likely to increase with the topic gaining prominence under Trump's second administration.

A consumer complaint alleging that the consumer was the subject of politicized or unlawful debanking is likely to receive additional attention — both by the subject bank and by the bank's regulators — and so may become a buzzword that consumers use strategically. Banks and other financial institutions should, therefore, consider strategies for escalating, reviewing and responding to consumer complaints alleging politicized or unlawful debanking.

Future Enforcement

Another element of Trump's debanking executive order is for the federal banking regulators to take action when they identify instances of politicized or unlawful debanking that violate applicable law.

In that regard, the order instructs the regulators to "take appropriate remedial action, to the extent authorized and consistent with applicable law, including levying fines, issuing consent decrees, or imposing other disciplinary measures against any financial institution." In some instances, the order instructs the regulator to refer the bank or financial institution to the U.S. attorney general.

Interestingly, the executive order references three federal statutes as potential sources of enforcement authority for the federal banking regulators: Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, Section 1031 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act, and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.[1]

At a high level, the FTC Act prohibits unfair and deceptive acts and practices, the Consumer Financial Protection Act prohibits unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices, and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act prohibits discrimination in credit transactions on the basis of certain enumerated bases, including religion.

Given that politicized or unlawful debanking is a high priority for the Trump administration, it seems highly likely that some of the federal bank regulators will attempt to utilize the aforementioned laws to enforce identified debanking instances.

However, these attempts may face legal hurdles and challenges. For example, if the CFPB were to try and categorize debanking based on political ideology or religion as an unfair practice under the Consumer Financial Protection Act, it may face the same pushback — and potentially the same outcome — that it did when it attempted to categorize discrimination as an unfair practice in its examination manual.

In March 2022, the CFPB updated its examination manual to explain how discrimination could constitute an unfair act or practice under the Consumer Financial Protection Act. That action was immediately challenged in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and several banking trade associations, in Chamber of Commerce v. CFPB. The plaintiffs alleged that the action exceeded the CFPB's statutory authority. The court agreed and vacated the CFPB's manual amendments.

The CFPB's exam manual case may become relevant if the CFPB were to attempt to categorize debanking as unfair, which is seemingly what Trump is contemplating in his executive order.

Similar statutory authority arguments regarding the CFPB's ability to interpret the Consumer Financial Protection Act may create a hurdle that could prove insurmountable for the CFPB to get over. Regardless, banks and other financial institutions should expect that their federal regulators are on the lookout for good enforcement opportunities and will not hesitate to make claims that debanking violates one or more applicable laws.

Republished with permission. This article, "What May Be Ahead In Debanking Enforcement," was published by Law360 on November 4, 2025.