Judges Order SNAP Funds During Shutdown

In a crucial victory for millions of Americans, two federal judges have ruled that the Trump administration must utilize contingency funds to continue SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) payments during the ongoing government shutdown. This decision comes just as the U.S. Department of Agriculture was planning to freeze payments, a move that would have severely impacted food security for about 1 in 8 Americans.

The rulings, issued nearly simultaneously on Friday, came as a direct response to legal challenges filed by Democratic state attorneys general and governors from 25 states, plus the District of Columbia. They argued that the administration has a legal obligation to keep the program running, especially given the program’s monthly cost of approximately $8 billion nationally.

Judicial Intervention to Protect Food Aid

A federal judge in Rhode Island ordered the administration to fund SNAP using at least the available contingency funds, requesting an update by Monday. Similarly, a judge in Massachusetts gave the administration until Monday to decide whether to partially fund November benefits with contingency money or fully fund them using additional resources. This intervention aims to prevent a complete halt to food assistance.

The administration had previously argued that a contingency fund of about $5 billion could not legally be used for SNAP, reversing an earlier USDA plan. However, the Democratic officials countered that this money not only could be used but must be, also pointing to a separate federal account with around $23 billion.

Skepticism and Nationwide Impact

During a hearing in Boston, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani expressed skepticism regarding the administration’s argument for suspending benefits. She noted that if funding is insufficient, there are processes for reducing benefits equitably rather than halting them entirely. “The steps involve finding an equitable way of reducing benefits,” Talwani stated, suggesting her ruling could apply nationwide, potentially challenging Supreme Court limitations on nationwide injunctions.

The rulings are expected to face appeals. Meanwhile, states, food banks, and SNAP recipients had been bracing for the worst, with many states announcing expedited funding for food banks or alternative methods to load benefits onto debit cards. Advocates emphasize that halting food aid would force difficult choices between groceries and other essential bills.

Political Blame and Eligibility

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins criticized Democrats, calling their stance a “disgusting dereliction of duty” for refusing to end a Senate filibuster while advocating for healthcare funds. A recent push to continue SNAP funding during the shutdown failed in Congress. For context, in 2025, a family of four typically needs a net income below the federal poverty line (around $31,000 annually) to qualify for SNAP. Last year, the program assisted 41 million people, with nearly two-thirds being families with children.