Bill
H 3433
Prohibits large financial institutions from denying or restricting services based on a customer’s protected speech, religion, associations, or certain lawful activities, requiring
Note on sources and jurisdiction
- The materials provided mix two different filings: a short Massachusetts House bill (H.3433) regarding the Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women, and a longer act titled the “Equality in Financial Services Act” drafted to amend the South Carolina Code (adding Chapter 31 to Title 37). The substantive “Equality in Financial Services Act” text below corresponds to the South Carolina draft (prefiled 12/05/2024). Where dates or procedural entries appear to reference other filings, they may relate to the Massachusetts item or mixed tracking data.
Purpose and intent
- The bill is intended to prohibit large financial institutions from denying, restricting, or terminating financial services on the basis of a person’s protected speech, religious exercise, associations, social views, or participation in specified lawful industries — particularly where those denials are based on what the bill calls a “social credit score.” It emphasizes transparency and accountability when financial institutions refuse to provide services.
Key definitions and thresholds
- “Financial institution”: banks with total assets over $100 billion, or payment processors/credit card companies/networks/payment gateways that processed more than $100 billion in transactions in the most recent calendar year; includes affiliates and subsidiaries.
- “Discriminate in the provision of financial services”: includes using a “social credit score” to refuse, terminate, or restrict services.
- “Social credit score”: broadly defined to cover analyses or scores that evaluate protected religious exercise, protected speech/association, refusal to adopt ESG/greenhouse gas targets beyond legal requirements, refusal to conduct racial/diversity audits or provide race/gender-based quotas, refusal to facilitate employee access to abortions or gender-reassignment services, and (with limited exceptions) participation in lawful firearm/ammunition or oil & gas business activity.
- Definitions are to be construed in favor of broad First Amendment protections.
Core prohibitions and duties
- Prohibits covered financial institutions from discriminating in provision of financial services or coordinating with others to do so.
- If a customer is refused service, or service is restricted/terminated, they may request a written “statement of specific reasons” within 90 days of notice; the institution must provide that statement by U.S. mail and email within 14 days of the request. (The provided text is truncated where further specifics would appear.)
- The bill requires transparency about the bases under which services may be denied and aims to prevent covert or undisclosed deplatforming-style denials.
Enforcement, remedies, and construction
- The draft states definitions must be read to favor broad constitutional protections. The provided excerpt is truncated before a full description of civil remedies, penalties, or enforcement mechanisms; the bill’s title and preamble indicate it also “provide remedies,” but specific remedies are not fully visible in the supplied text.
Who would be affected
- Large banks and major payment processors/networks meeting the $100 billion thresholds (and their affiliates).
- Customers and businesses that could be denied or limited in access to accounts, payment services, or other financial products.
- Industries specifically called out (firearms/ammunition, oil & gas, abortion-related services, ESG-related conduct) and persons exercising protected speech or religion.
Procedural/timeline notes (from supplied tracking)
- Prefiled: 12/05/2024 (text supplied).
- Introduced/referred: entries show referral activity in January–February 2025 and sponsor additions (e.g., March 11, 2025). Multiple hearing dates are listed for 10/29/2025 (scheduling/rescheduling noted). Because the package includes mixed jurisdictional entries, confirm with the South Carolina legislature’s official docket for the bill’s current status and exact procedural steps.
Caveats
- The supplied text is truncated in places (notably the detailed contents of the required “statement of specific reasons” and the remedies/enforcement section). Readers should consult the full bill text and official legislative docket for complete provisions, exact enforcement mechanisms, and any amendments.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
