Until the government wins its case, Epstein was presumed innocent.
It’s not as if JP Morgan discovered that Epstein was doing money laundering and didn’t report it to the authorities who could have looked into it. The judiciary had all the tools it needed to prosecute Epstein and assess whatever financial penalties it wished, as part of its criminal investigations.
I don’t like the idea that the bank’s head should say, “it sounds like this guy is guilty, so let’s de-bank him and send him a check.” Even though, it looked pretty likely that he was guilty, and it turned out that he was. This is retrospective quarterbacking.
If that action was allowable, what’s to stop banks with Dem-infested management from debanking Trump now, who is being accused of all sorts of treachery?
Banks are not law enforcement and should cooperate with the authorities when someone is breaking the law or is suspected of doing so.
Banks should operate based on Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and policies which should be voted on by shareholders when it affects who they do business with. Lots of banks have traditionally restricted the types of businesses they offer services to. For example, many banks avoid dealing with risky businesses like gaming/gambling. Many do not offer services to adult entertainment businesses.
The important thing is that they should not operate on the whims of management.
Banks should be treated as public accommodations and should not be allowed to deny service to individuals for political reasons. (Political views are not the basis of a protected class of people currently, but they should be.)