The biggest bank in the US has begun blocking certain transactions from Zelle after hundreds of millions of dollars in scams were reportedly facilitated through the payments platform.

US banking giant JPMorgan Chase is now giving pop-ups to Zelle users who try to send money to people who appear to originate from social media, CNBC reports.

The bank warns that over half of all the Zelle scams are initiated through social media platforms.

Melissa Feldsher, JPMorgan’s head of payments and lending innovation, says that the bank doesn’t recommend using apps like Zelle for sending payments to people you aren’t familiar with.

“Many of the interactions that are happening over social media are between people that don’t know each other, and as a result, you are having interactions [that are] leading to money exchange between people that don’t know each other.

We think in instances that you are transacting and sending money to someone you don’t know, you should be using a product that has purchase protection, products that we offer at Chase, like debit cards and credit cards. We don’t think you should be using products like Zelle – the same way you wouldn’t use cash to send money to buy something from someone you’ve never met or goods you have never seen.”

A recent Senate report from last July found that $207 million worth of Zelle payments were disputed as scams from customers at JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Wells Fargo – the vast majority of which went unreimbursed.

Follow us on X, Facebook and Telegram

Don’t Miss a Beat – Subscribe to get email alerts delivered directly to your inbox

Check Price Action

Surf The Daily Hodl Mix

&nbsp

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed at The Daily Hodl are not investment advice. Investors should do their due diligence before making any high-risk investments in Bitcoin, cryptocurrency or digital assets. Please be advised that your transfers and trades are at your own risk, and any losses you may incur are your responsibility. The Daily Hodl does not recommend the buying or selling of any cryptocurrencies or digital assets, nor is The Daily Hodl an investment advisor. Please note that The Daily Hodl participates in affiliate marketing.

President Donald Trump came into office with plans to enact his agenda at breakneck speed, and to some extent, it’s working. Less than 100 days into his second term, Trump has already issued 99 executive orders — a “shock and awe” approach meant to overwhelm his opposition and signal decisive action to his supporters.

However, the courts have emerged as a key obstacle slowing down the implementation of Trump’s policies. Advocates for the many people suffering from those policies — including immigrants, scientists, government workers, and the other everyday Americans who rely on them — are suing the administration and racking up key wins. 

Nearly 140 lawsuits have challenged Trump’s executive actions so far, according to Just Security’s litigation tracker. Many of them have centered on the efforts spearheaded by Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency” to slash staffing and spending across the federal government. But they have also focused on Trump’s attacks on undocumented immigrants and on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility policies in government and beyond. 

So far, federal courts have already blocked, in part or in whole, many of Trump’s executive actions — at least for now. That includes his ban on transgender military servicemembers, his executive order ending birthright citizenship, his efforts to fire thousands of probationary government employees, his attempts to deport people under an obscure 18th-century law, and more. Some of those blocks could later be lifted or made permanent in ongoing litigation and appeals that could reach the Supreme Court. 

It’s not clear to what extent the courts will be able to delay, if not entirely stop, some of Trump’s policies from going into effect. 

Notably, blocks on some of Trump’s policies stayed in place through the end of his first term because courts ran out of time to resolve legal challenges to them. Trump’s proposals to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, create work requirements for Medicaid, and put a citizenship status question on the 2020 census never went into effect as a result. But in his second term, his administration has hit the ground running, allowing more time for lawsuits to play out and policies to take effect. He was also able to reshape the judiciary during his first term by appointing conservative judges who might favor his policies. 

There is also a question of what this Supreme Court will do. As the ultimate interpreter of the law and the Constitution, the court will play a major role in checking — or abetting — Trump’s power grabs. (My colleague Ian Millhiser breaks down two cases in particular to follow.) 

And then there is the concern that Trump will continue to ignore court orders. The US is arguably facing a constitutional crisis after the administration did not abide by a judge’s order to turn around planes transporting accused Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts issued a rare public rebuke of Trump after the president attacked the judge in the El Salvador case as a “Radical Left Lunatic.” 

Trump and his administration are determined to expand the president’s power, even when that means disrupting the Constitution’s system of checks and balances or trampling civil liberties. With congressional Republicans complicit in that power grab, the courts have emerged as the Constitution’s most effective defense — at least for now.