Two U.S. federal judges have ruled that the Trump administration must continue funding the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) during the current government shutdown, sparing millions of Americans from a potential lapse in food assistance. The emergency court orders, issued just hours before the benefits were set to expire on November 1, came after a lawsuit filed by 25 Democratic governors and state attorneys general argued that the shutdown’s impact on SNAP was an emergency requiring immediate action. The administration had previously stated it would not use its $5 billion contingency fund to support food aid for the month of November, citing the need to preserve funds for disaster response.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, in a ruling from Boston, ordered the Trump administration to resume SNAP payments and requested detailed information on its funding plans by Monday, November 3. A separate judge in Rhode Island, John McConnell, also issued an emergency order requiring the administration to tap emergency funds to continue paying for SNAP benefits ‘as soon as possible.’ Both judges expressed grave concerns over the potential harm to low-income Americans, with Talwani noting that the suspension of SNAP would be ‘devastating.’ State leaders argued that the abrupt cutoff would disproportionately affect vulnerable populations, with many unable to access alternative means of support during the shutdown. The Justice Department has not yet indicated whether it will appeal these rulings.
Talwani heard arguments from the Trump administration and the coalition of Democratic governors, who argued that the suspension of SNAP benefits would have catastrophic effects on millions of Americans. She seemed sympathetic to the states’ position, stating that it was ‘hard to understand how this isn’t an emergency.’ She reiterated that the courts would decide by November 3 whether the administration should continue funding SNAP. The states had argued that the USDA had sufficient funds to cover November benefits but had failed to use them, leading to the legal battle.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration had faced mounting pressure to provide an immediate solution to the funding crisis. While the USDA had not yet provided details on its policy decision to withhold funds from SNAP, it had stated on its website that the ‘well has run dry’ and that no benefits would be issued starting November 1. This decision sparked widespread concern among advocates and state officials, who warned of the severe impact on food insecurity, particularly among families with children, the elderly, and those living in poverty. The Justice Department has not yet announced its plans to appeal these court orders, but the rulings have provided temporary relief to millions of Americans whose livelihoods depend on SNAP benefits.
As the government shutdown continues, the legal battles over SNAP funding have become a focal point for the broader debate over the administration’s management of federal programs. The decisions by the two federal judges have temporarily averted a critical lapse in food assistance, but the underlying issues of budgetary responsibility and emergency funding remain unresolved. With the political and legal landscape remaining in flux, the outcome of any potential appeals will determine the long-term stability of the SNAP program and the extent of the administration’s accountability to the American public.