Skip to content Skip to footer

Trump Appointee Resigns as FDIC Chair After Failing to Stymie Policy Review

Jelena McWilliams resigned after a kerfuffle over Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s bank merger policy.

Jelena McWilliams testifies during a hearing before Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee at Dirksen Senate Office Building on August 3, 2021, in Washington, D.C.

What has been described as both “open lawlessness” and a “partisan brawl” came to an end Friday when Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Chair Jelena McWilliams — an appointee of former President Donald Trump — revealed she is resigning, which will give Democrats control of the agency.

In a letter to President Joe Biden published on the FDIC’s website, McWilliams said she intends to step down effective February 4, 2022. Politico pointed out that her resignation “means that FDIC board member Martin Gruenberg will become acting chair, his third stint atop at the 88-year-old agency, which insures trillions of dollars in deposits at the nation’s banks.”

Noting McWilliams’ recent conflict with the three Democrats on the five-member board — which already had one vacancy — the Revolving Door Project at the Center for Economic and Policy Research said that her departure is “good news for financial stability, and the rule of law,” as well as “a victory for democracy and a blow to Trumpism.”

The Open Markets Institute also welcomed her resignation, highlighting that it comes after she tried and failed “to subvert a democratic vote of the FDIC board to review bank merger policy.”

Although McWilliams’ letter did not mention the controversy, as Politico detailed:

Earlier this month, the Democratic majority on the FDIC’s board voted to take public feedback on potential changes to the agency’s bank merger approval process. McWilliams did not participate in the vote, and the FDIC in an official statement said the action was not valid. A legal debate ensued over whether a majority of the board can put items up for a vote without the consent of the chair, with Democrats maintaining they had clear authority.

At a board meeting that was livestreamed, McWilliams rejected a bid by Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director Rohit Chopra—an FDIC board member and ally of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)—to add a record of the vote to the FDIC’s official minutes.

Later, in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, McWilliams referred to the episode as a “hostile takeover.”

Todd Phillips, director of financial regulation and corporate governance at the leftist think tank the Center for American Progress and formerly an attorney for the FDIC, argued in November that McWilliams was failing on climate and “the other members of the FDIC’s board of directors have the inherent authority to take control of the agency; they need only to demonstrate the will to do so.”

The New York Times reported earlier this month that while some progressives — such as Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) — emphasized that the Democratic FDIC members’ action “was not simply a power grab and that they really did care about bank mergers,” Phillips had framed it as a test for McWilliams.

“This is the first shot across the bow, seeing what the chairman’s response might be,” he said. “If they do end up being victorious on this issue, I think we’ll see the progressive directors throwing their weight around to move the FDIC in a direction that it hasn’t been in the past few years.”

Max Moran, research director at the Revolving Door Project, called out some media outlets — including by the Times and Politico — in an opinion piece for The Hill last week, accusing them of covering the “hugely consequential standoff” like “another partisan soap opera, with an aggrieved Republican on one side… and an ambitious interloper on the other.”

“McWilliams and Chopra both make compelling characters, but only one is quite clearly violating the law, and attempting to seize absolute power over a crucial agency with no repercussions,” Moran wrote, outlining the recent events with alarm.

Jeff Hauser, who leads the Revolving Door Project, tweeted Friday that McWilliams’ resignation “is basically a confession.”

“Reminder: This had to happen eventually,” Hauser said. “The extent to which early coverage of McWilliams’ lawlessness was positive was INFURIATING — she had ZERO legal justification for her coup. Hope all Trumpist Big Lies are treated less credulously in 2022!”

Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn

Dear Truthout Community,

If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.

We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.

Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.

There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.

After the election, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?

It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.

We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.

We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.

Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.

We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.

With love, rage, and solidarity,

Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy