Capital One has asked a federal court in Florida to dismiss a lawsuit from the Trump Organization, arguing that the bank closed hundreds of accounts in 2021 for anti-money-laundering (AML) reasons — not as political retaliation after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, as the Trump businesses allege.
In a motion to dismiss filed Friday, Capital One’s attorneys say the closures were the result of a monthslong review by the bank’s financial-crimes unit, which the filing describes as staffed by employees with decades of law-enforcement experience. The bank characterizes its action as a compliance decision reached after extended analysis, rather than a posturing response to politics.
The dispute concerns roughly 385 accounts tied to the Trump Organization, Eric Trump and a variety of affiliated companies — including a winery, a bottled-water business and a golf course developer — that had banked with Capital One for more than a decade before their accounts were shut down in mid-2021. The Trump entities sued, claiming the shutdowns were politically motivated and intended to distance the bank from former President Trump following the Capitol attack.
Capital One disputes that account, calling the plaintiffs’ theory “cherry-picked” and saying the bank’s records do not support the allegation that the AML explanation was fabricated. The bank also notes it did not publicize its decision or internal process, and provided the Trump-linked companies months and several extensions to move funds before the accounts were closed.
The new filing reiterates an earlier defense: the bank’s account agreements gave it broad discretion to terminate relationships. That contract language — allowing a bank to close an account “at any time, for any or no reason and without notice” — led U.S. District Judge Roy Altman in March to dismiss an earlier version of the lawsuit. Capital One is asking Altman to dismiss the amended complaint permanently, without permitting another refile.
The bank is also pushing back against a recently added fraud claim that it defrauded the plaintiffs by remaining silent about its motivations. Capital One argues it had no contractual duty to explain the closures, and says federal banking-secrecy laws would likely have prohibited disclosing internal AML findings even if it had wanted to.
That secrecy concern is central to a related fight over sealed court materials. Capital One has asked the court to keep portions of an exhibit sealed, citing the Bank Secrecy Act along with the need to protect employee names, customer account numbers and unrelated compensation details. The Trump companies do not oppose sealing account numbers or the single Secrecy Act-related passage, but are contesting other redactions. Large sections of the Trump-linked amended complaint remain blacked out under a court-approved sealing order, including a portion titled “January 6, 2021: The Political Trigger.”
It is not publicly clear whether banks that later handled Trump Organization business raised similar AML concerns or what steps the organization may have taken in response to Capital One’s determination. The Trump Organization did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The Capital One suit is one of several legal fights arising from account closures in that period. A separate complaint filed in January names JPMorgan Chase and makes similar allegations about accounts closed around the same time. Last August, President Trump issued an executive order directing regulators to address what he and some conservatives describe as politically motivated “debanking.”
Capital One and the Trump Organization have previously clashed; in 2019 Trump sued Capital One and Deutsche Bank to block disclosure of financial records to a congressional inquiry. For now, the issue in Florida centers on whether the court will allow the amended complaint to proceed in light of the bank’s claimed AML justification and the contractual right to end account relationships.