Hello Reader,
​
In the days following the January 6th riots of 2021, Bank of America quietly compiled a list of customers who had recently used their credit or debit cards anywhere in the D.C. area. Without any legal process—no warrant, no subpoena, no court order—the bank "voluntarily" handed this list to the FBI.
​
Suddenly, the names of thousands of Americans who had used a Bank of America card to buy lunch, pay for parking, or shop for groceries were flagged in a federal database. None were suspected of wrongdoing. None were given notice. None had any idea their private financial data was now in the hands of federal investigators.
​
This dragnet sweep reveals the ugly truth about America's financial surveillance state: your bank account has become a government file, accessible at will by federal agents who've turned private financial institutions into extensions of law enforcement.

When Banks Became Government Informants

The House Judiciary Committee's December 2024 investigation exposed the shocking scope of this surveillance. After January 6, the Biden Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) distributed materials to banks outlining "typologies" of suspicious persons and providing "suggested search terms" for identifying transactions on behalf of federal law enforcement.
​
The keyword list reads like a political hit list: "MAGA," "Trump," purchases at Bass Pro Shops, Cabela's, Dick's Sporting Goods, and even "religious texts" like Bibles, which federal investigators warned banks could indicate "extremism."
​
Think about that. If you purchased a Bible, bought a fishing pole at Dick's, or used "Stop MAGA" in a payment message, your transaction was flagged for federal review because you might hold the wrong political views.
​
The Committee also found that the FBI manipulated the Suspicious Activity Report system, treating banks as "de facto arms of law enforcement" and obtaining "virtually unchecked access to private financial data." Federal agencies provided banks with lists of people they viewed as generally "suspicious," turning the legal framework "on its head" and violating the Fourth Amendment's requirements of particularity and probable cause.

The Fourth Amendment Under Siege

The Constitution's Fourth Amendment protects "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures."
​
Financial records have historically been considered part of one's "papers" under the Fourth Amendment. But in 1970, the Bank Secrecy Act first required banks to maintain detailed records of large cash transactions and report suspicious activity, laying the foundation for the surveillance apparatus we have today.
​
Then, in landmark 1976 case United States v. Miller, the liberal majority Supreme Court ruled that bank customers have no reasonable expectation of privacy in financial records held by banks, establishing the "third-party doctrine." The Court argued that because banks are third parties holding the records, customers forfeit their privacy rights. Never mind that participation in the modern economy requires using banks, which require disclosure of intimate details of your life.
​
This legal fiction has only grown more invasive over time—the Patriot Act of 2001 dramatically expanded these powers, lowering reporting thresholds and broadening the definition of suspicious activity.

Family Dinner for Four Flags the Feds

While the Biden administration deserves condemnation for weaponizing financial surveillance against political opponents, the Trump administration has now escalated these privacy violations. In March, FinCEN implemented new rules dropping cash transaction reporting thresholds from $10,000 to $200 in thirty ZIP codes across border counties in California and Texas, ostensibly for anti-cartel enforcement.
​
In targeted counties, any cash transaction above $200—whether a withdrawal, deposit, or currency exchange—triggers a federal report including names, addresses, Social Security numbers, and transaction details. Buying your family dinner in Texas or California can now land you in a government surveillance database.
​
The move affects over one million Americans who now face financial monitoring akin to China's Social Credit System, which tracks financial transactions alongside other data to assign "trustworthiness" scores and enable social control. While America hasn't made that full leap, the infrastructure being built is similar.
​
Once financial surveillance systems are in place, governments rarely cede privacy rights back. Tellingly, no meaningful reforms have been implemented based on the House Judiciary Committee's explosive findings about post-January 6th financial surveillance abuses.
​
Trump's March executive order requiring inter-agency data sharing compounds these concerns by creating a central view of citizens across multiple departments. While data sharing sounds reasonable, it enables the government to aggregate financial and other data and use it far beyond its intended purpose, a small but dangerous step toward China's system of total surveillance.

"Immediate and Irreparable Harm"

But there's hope in the judiciary. The Institute for Justice and Texas Association of Money Services Businesses challenged the $200 rule in federal court, arguing it violates constitutional protections. In April, a U.S. District Judge issued a temporary restraining order halting the surveillance requirements.
​
The court's language was remarkable. Judge Sammartino described the $200 surveillance order as causing "immediate and irreparable harm" and ruled that the government's actions were "arbitrary and capricious".
​
But the temporary restraining orders have expired, and the current status remains fluid as litigation continues. The cases face an uphill battle, but it could reach the Supreme Court, which already began to chip away at Miller in a 2018 ruling. The antiquated third-party doctrine, which Justice Sotomayor called “ill-suited to the digital age”, may even be overturned.

Your Liberty in the Balance

Financial privacy isn't just about our money—it's about our liberty. When the government tracks every purchase, donation, and transaction, it knows everything about our beliefs, associations, and activities. By allowing the government to obtain this information, we empower partisan actors—like a President with a penchant for vendetta—to misuse it.
​
The question now is whether Americans will demand their constitutional rights back before it's too late.
​

Refer a Friend:

If you've enjoyed this episode of Dispatches from the Rebellion, please consider referring a friend. Forward this email and ask them to click on the "Subscribe" button below to sign up.

​