1. Limit "jawboning" with an EO and personnel changes. The most widespread abuses aren't from regs, published guidance, or enforcement actions. They're informal: regulators expressing "concerns," raising eyebrows, etc. This "jawboning" comes cloaked in many guises, like "reputational risk" and "red flags." For closely regulated businesses like banks, a wink is as a good as a rule, because regulators wield so much power and have extremely broad discretion. Drawing a perfect line to separate valid concerns about compliance from abusive requests is hard or even impossible. But two narrower fixes are easy. First, issue an executive order[*] requiring financial regulators to ban their personnel from requesting or encouraging the denial of services based solely on an account-holder's First Amendment-protected speech or associations, use of crypto, or status as a business in any lawful industry, including crypto, firearms, etc. Second, appoint financial regulators willing to investigate ongoing and past abuses, clean house, and put new personnel on the job who won't abuse their stations. These may be temporary fixes, but they'll work and, over the longer term, begin to change the culture. [*] For the legal nerds, yes, there's a potential issue with financial regulators being "independent" agencies. But (1) unclear how much that matters following Seila Law and Collins and (2) the President can and should choose appointees willing--really, eager--to coordinate and do the right thing here. (2/4)