In a malicious use of civil rights statutes, the Biden Regime is ordering banks to make loans to illegal aliens, claiming that a bank that uses alienage and unlawful presence by said alien to be practicing some sort of discrimination under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA).

The Biden administration has warned U.S. banks and other financial institutions that they can’t reject illegal immigrants’ credit applications based solely or predominantly on their immigration status.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) said in a recent statement that rejecting illegal immigrants for credit cards and various types of loans just because they are noncitizens is unlawful.

The two agencies stated that they were issuing the warning “because consumers have reported being rejected for credit cards as well as for auto, student, personal and equipment loans because of their immigration status, even when they have strong credit histories and ties to the United States and are otherwise qualified to receive the loans.”

Biden Admin Orders Banks Not to Reject Illegal Immigrants’ Loan Applications, by Tom Ozimek, The Epoch Times, October 14, 2023

Now, a review of the Act shows the following language that prohibits discrimination in lending is based on several common characteristics that originate in the original Civil Rights Act of 1964.

(a) Activities constituting discrimination

It shall be unlawful for any creditor to discriminate against any applicant, with respect to any aspect of a credit transaction—

(1) on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex or marital status, or age (provided the applicant has the capacity to contract);

Equal Credit Opportunity, US Code, 15 USC Chapter 41, Subchapter IV:

Note what is missing from the Act: alienage and immigration status, as prohibited categories for discrimination. If it is not mentioned, then it is a legal basis for discrimination.

That language, mirroring the Civil Rights Act, is deliberate, as alienage and immigration status are bases for lawful discrimination, such as in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended, that prohibits employment of certain aliens and limits other aliens to certain approved employers and immigration statuses.

Another example of discrimination in employment is that the Federal government is generally prohibited from employing aliens, including Lawful Permanent Residents (green card holders).

But the Biden Regime has a strategy: they fraudulently conflate race and national origin with alienage and immigration status.

In a statement, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Credit Financial Protection Board (CFPB) claim that an implementing regulation to the ECOA, Regulation B, extends the non-discrimination protection regarding race and national origin to alienage and immigration status.

While Regulation B describes certain conditions under which creditors may consider immigration status, creditors should remain cognizant that ECOA and Regulation B expressly forbid discrimination on the basis of certain protected characteristics, including race and national origin.

Immigration status may broadly overlap with or, in certain circumstances, serve as a proxy for these protected characteristics. Creditors should therefore be aware that if their consideration of immigration status is not “necessary to ascertain the creditor’s rights and remedies regarding repayment” and it results in discrimination on a prohibited basis, it violates ECOA and Regulation B.

Joint Statement on Fair Lending and Credit Opportunities for Noncitizen Borrowers
under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, DOJ and CFPB, Oct 12, 2023

While the Biden Regime conflates race and national origin with alienage and immigration status, the regulations they use to justify such conflation instead specifically permit the use of immigration status in credit determinations.

Permanent residency and immigration status. A creditor may inquire about the permanent residency and immigration status of an applicant or any other person in connection with a credit transaction…

Immigration status. A creditor may consider the applicant’s immigration status or status as a permanent resident of the United States, and any additional information that may be necessary to ascertain the creditor’s rights and remedies regarding repayment.

Part 1002—Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B), Code of Federal Regulations, December 21, 2011

In fact, Regulation B specifically notes that alienage and immigration status may be used based on law, such as the INA.

National origin. A creditor may not refuse to grant credit because an applicant comes from a particular country but may take the applicant’s immigration status into account. A creditor may also take into account any applicable law, regulation, or executive order restricting dealings with citizens (or the government) of a particular country or imposing limitations regarding credit extended for their use.

This language is used to make it clear that alienage and national origin are not interchangeable, and that credit rights correspond to immigration status and even national origin can be used, such as with statutes and executive orders that restrict access to the U.S. financial system by certain nationals, usually based a foreign policy, war making, or counter-terrorism authority or statute.

The Biden Regime plan is to use this obscure area of civil rights law regarding credit to change the legal definitions of race and national origin to be the same as alienage and immigration status. If, as the joint statement claims, race and national origin commonly intersect, serving as a proxy for immigration status and alienage, then discrimination based on alienage and immigration status is illegal across the board. Interestingly, it is basically admitting that all illegal aliens are non-white and therefore worthy of protection.

The ultimate purpose is to administratively repeal the INA’s statutory restrictions on employment of aliens, making all illegal aliens eligible for employment, as, in their reasoning, discrimination based on alienage and immigration status equate discrimination based on race and national origin.

The reasoning is, of course, fallacious. The statutory language prohibiting race and national origin–based discrimination has never before been held as applying to alienage or immigration status. And is itself contradicted by either the regulations themselves or other statutes. But lawlessness is the primary aspect of the Biden Regime.