Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. U.S. House of Representatives

Financial data can tell a person’s story, including one’s “religion, ideology, opinions, and interests”1 as well as one’s “political leanings, locations, and more.”2 Because of this data’s usefulness, federal law enforcement agencies increasingly coordinate with financial institutions to secure even greater access to Americans’ private financial information, often without legal process, and use federal laws like the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) to do so. This interim report continues the oversight of the Committee on the Judiciary and its Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government into financial surveillance in the United States. Based. on nonpublic documents, this report sheds new light on the decaying state of Americans’ financial privacy and the federal government’s widespread, warrantless surveillance programs.

The Committee and Select Subcommittee began this investigation into government-led financial surveillance after a whistleblower disclosed that following the events of January 6, 2021, Bank of America (BoA), voluntarily and without legal process, provided the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) with a list of names of all individuals who used a BoA credit or debit card in the Washington, D.C. region around that time.3 In response to these allegations and corroborating testimony from FBI officials, the Committee and Select Subcommittee requested documents from BoA and six other national financial institutions about the provision of Americans’ private financial information to federal law enforcement without legal process.4 On March 6, 2024, the Committee and Select Subcommittee released an interim report revealing that federal law enforcement had used sweeping search terms like “MAGA” and “TRUMP” to target Americans and even treated purchases of religious texts or firearms as indicators of “extremism.”5 That report detailed how federal law enforcement derisively viewed American citizens—treating Americans who expressed opposition to firearm regulations, open borders, COVID-19 lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and the “deep state” as potential domestic terrorists.6