What investigations or regulatory actions targeted JPMorgan Chase for political account closures and in what year?

1. The private lawsuit alleging political account closures — filed in January 2026

President Donald Trump filed a civil suit against JPMorgan Chase and CEO Jamie Dimon in January 2026 alleging that the bank closed his accounts for political reasons after the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot and seeking $5 billion in damages; the filing and subsequent coverage make this the most direct legal action targeting the bank over political-account-closure claims in the current reporting ^{[1] [6] [2]}. JPMorgan publicly rejected the allegations, saying it “does not close accounts for political or religious reasons” and framing account terminations as actions taken when accounts pose legal or regulatory risk ^{[1] [7] [2]}.

2. Regulators’ sector-wide reviews and findings reported contemporaneously — reported in early 2026

Media reports cited regulator findings that, in a sector-wide review published in the weeks before the lawsuit, federal officials had concluded that nine of the nation’s largest banks had made “inappropriate distinctions” among customers based on business activities, with sectors such as oil and gas, private prisons and adult entertainment facing restricted access — coverage that was reported in January 2026 and discussed alongside the Trump-JPMC dispute ^[2]. These findings were presented as part of broader scrutiny into bank decisions about which customers and industries to serve, not as an enforcement action singularly focused on JPMorgan for political-account closures ^[2].

3. Government reviews vs. formal enforcement actions — distinction and timing

The reporting distinguishes between a regulator-led review of banking practices (a sector-wide inquiry reported around January 2026) and formal enforcement proceedings; the material supplied shows the former but does not document a regulator issuing fines or formal charges against JPMorgan specifically for political-account closures in the sources provided ^[2]. In contrast, JPMorgan did face distinct SEC enforcement settlements in late 2024 involving disclosure and self-dealing issues unrelated to debanking: the firm agreed to pay $151 million to resolve multiple SEC cases in October 2024 ^{[4] [5]}.

4. JPMorgan’s stated defense and the political context

JPMorgan’s consistent public defense in the coverage is categorical: account closures are decisions based on legal or regulatory risk, not political or religious views, and the bank said it would defend itself in court against Trump’s suit ^{[1] [7] [3]}. Reporters and outside commentators framed the January 2026 lawsuit against the backdrop of heightened political attention to “debanking,” including executive interest in regulatory reviews and critiques by political actors — context that shaped media focus but does not substitute for a documented regulator sanction against JPMorgan for politicized account closures ^{[8] [3]}.

5. What the available reporting does and does not show

The provided sources document a high-profile private lawsuit filed in January 2026 and contemporaneous regulator reviews of bank practices that raised concerns about differential treatment of customer sectors ^{[1] [2]}. They do not, in these excerpts, show a named regulatory enforcement action or penalty levied specifically at JPMorgan for politically motivated account closures; the only explicit regulatory enforcement discussing JPMorgan in these sources concerns unrelated SEC settlements in October 2024 ^{[4] [5]}. Any definitive assertion that regulators formally targeted JPMorgan for political-account-closure violations would exceed what the supplied reporting establishes.