BOSTON (AP) — Two federal judges ruled almost simultaneously Friday that President Donald Trump’s administration must continue paying SNAP, the nation’s largest food assistance program, using emergency reserve funds during the government shutdown.
Judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island gave the administration leeway on whether to partially or fully fund the program by November. That also creates uncertainty about how things will play out and will delay payments for many beneficiaries whose cards would normally be topped up at the beginning of the month.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture planned to freeze payments to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program starting Nov. 1 because it said it could no longer fund it due to the shutdown. The program serves approximately 1 in 8 Americans and is an important part of the country’s social safety net. It costs about $8 billion a month nationally.
U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat and ranking member of the Senate Agriculture Committee that oversees the food aid program, said Friday’s rulings by judges nominated by former President Barack Obama confirm what Democrats have been saying: “The administration is choosing not to feed Americans in need, despite knowing it is legally obligated to do so.”
Trump posted on social media Friday criticizing congressional Democrats for the shutdown and suggesting the government would comply with rulings but also that he needed more clarity first: “If the Court gives us proper legal direction, I will be HONORED to provide the funds.”
Judges agree that at least one fund should go to SNAP
Democratic state attorneys general or governors from 25 states and the District of Columbia questioned the plan to pause the program, maintaining that the administration has a legal obligation to keep it running in their jurisdictions.
The administration said it was not allowed to use a contingency fund of about $5 billion for the program, reversing a pre-shutdown USDA plan that said money would be used to keep SNAP running. Democratic officials said that money not only could be used, it should be used. They also said a separate fund with about $23 billion is available for the cause.
Related videos
In Providence, Rhode Island, U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell ruled from the bench in a case brought by cities and nonprofits that the program must be funded using at least contingency funds. He asked for an update on progress by Monday.
Receive weekly health news
Receive the latest medical news and health information every Sunday.
In addition to ordering the federal government to use emergency reserves to replenish SNAP benefits, McConnell ruled that all exemptions from previous work requirements must continue to be honored. During the shutdown, the USDA ended existing waivers that waived work requirements for seniors, veterans and others.
There were similar elements in the Boston case, where U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani ruled in a written opinion that the USDA must pay for SNAP, calling the suspension “unlawful.” He ordered the federal government to tell the court by Monday whether they will use emergency reserve funds to provide reduced SNAP benefits for November or fully fund the program “using contingency funds and additional available funds.”
“Defendants’ suspension of SNAP payments was based on the erroneous conclusion that contingency funds could not be used to ensure the continuation of SNAP payments,” he wrote. “This court has now clarified that defendants must use those contingency funds as needed for the SNAP program.”
For many, benefits will continue to be delayed after the ruling.
No matter how the rulings are made, benefits for millions of people will be delayed in November because the card loading process can take a week or more in many states.
The administration did not immediately say whether it would appeal the rulings.
States, food banks and SNAP recipients have been preparing for an abrupt change in how low-income people can get food. Advocates and recipients say stopping food aid would force people to choose between buying food and paying other bills.
Most states have announced more or faster funding for food banks or novel ways to load at least some benefits onto SNAP debit cards.
Across the United States, advocates who had been sounding the alarm for weeks about the pending cutoff of SNAP benefits breathed a small sigh of relief when the ruling came down Friday, while acknowledging that the victory is temporary and possibly not complete.
“Thousands of food banks, pantries and other nonprofits across the country can avoid the impossible burden that would have resulted if SNAP benefits had been stopped,” said Diane Yentel, president and CEO of the National Council of Nonprofits, one of the plaintiffs in the Rhode Island case.
The possibility of reduced profits also means uncertainty
Cynthia Kirkhart, executive director of Facing Hunger Food Bank in Huntington, West Virginia, said her organization and the pantries it serves in Kentucky, Ohio and West Virginia will keep their overtime hours this weekend, knowing that people whose benefits usually arrive at the beginning of the month won’t see them.
“What we know, unless the administration is magical, is that nothing will happen tomorrow,” he said.
Kristle Johnson, a full-time nursing student and mother of three in Florida, is concerned about the possibility of benefits being reduced.
Despite buying meat in bulk, carefully planning meals and not buying junk food, she said, her $994-a-month benefit doesn’t allow her to buy a full month’s worth of food.
“Now I have to deal with someone who wants to get rid of everything I have to keep my family afloat until I can get better,” Johnson said of Trump.
The ruling does not resolve partisan disputes
At a news conference in Washington earlier Friday, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, whose department administers SNAP, said the contingency funds in question would not cover the cost of the program for long. At a news conference with House Speaker Mike Johnson on Capitol Hill, he blamed Democrats for carrying out a “disgusting dereliction of duty” by refusing to end their Senate filibuster while they wait for an extension of health care funding.
An attempt this week to continue SNAP funding during the shutdown failed in Congress.
To qualify for SNAP in 2025, a family of four’s net income after certain expenses cannot exceed the federal poverty line, which is about $31,000 per year. Last year, SNAP provided assistance to 41 million people, nearly two-thirds of whom were families with children.
“The court’s ruling protects millions of families, seniors and veterans from being used as leverage in a political fight and upholds the principle that no one in America should go hungry,” Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, said of the Rhode Island decision.
___
Mulvihill reported from Haddonfield, New Jersey; and Kruesi of Providence, Rhode Island. Associated Press reporter Lisa Mascaro in Washington, D.C., contributed.
