Federal Judges Rule Trump Administration Must Utilize Contingency Funds for SNAP During Shutdown
Court Rulings on SNAP Payments
Two federal judges issued rulings on Friday requiring the Trump administration to access emergency contingency funds to continue payments for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) amid the ongoing government shutdown. This decision comes as approximately 42 million Americans rely on SNAP benefits to assist with food purchases.
In a Massachusetts courtroom, Judge Indira Talwani determined that the administration is legally obligated to utilize available emergency funds for at least partial SNAP payments. She mandated that the government report back by Monday regarding its plans to comply with the ruling. Simultaneously, a judge in Rhode Island granted a request for a temporary restraining order on behalf of various municipalities and nonprofits, effectively blocking the imminent freeze on funding. The court instructed the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to disperse the contingency funds and report back by noon on Monday.
Legal Justifications for the Rulings
Judge Talwani’s ruling clarified that the government’s interpretation of statutory regulations-stating that the $5 billion contingency fund cannot be tapped due to the lack of new appropriations-is incorrect. “At core, Defendants’ conclusion that USDA is statutorily prohibited from funding SNAP because Congress has not enacted new appropriations for the current fiscal year is errstartous,” Talwani wrote. She emphasized that the USDA is mandated to use the previously appropriated SNAP contingency reserve as necessary.
While Talwani did not specifically order the release of SNAP payments on Saturday, she gave the administration room to consider whether to authorize at least reduced benefits for November and required an update to the court by Monday.
Impact of Funding Lapse
With the government shutdown now in its 31st day, the Trump administration contended that SNAP funds would be exhausted imminently. In a memo circulated last week, the USDA stated, “the well has run dry,” indicating that November benefits would be jeopardized without a resolution to the shutdown.
The lawsuits brought by a coalition of states-including Massachusetts and the District of Columbia-argued that halting SNAP payments constituted an unlawful act that would adversely affect millions of Americans reliant on these benefits. They warned that cutting off SNAP assistance could lead to rising food insecurity and related health issues, particularly among children, who may face cognitive and behavioral challenges due to inadequate nutrition.
Future Considerations
The USDA, which oversees SNAP, historically maintained that the contingency funds could only be accessed if the underlying funding stream is active. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins reiterated this stance, stating, “By law, the contingency fund can only flow when the underlying fund is flowing.” However, Judge Talwani rejected this line of reasoning and noted that the court’s directive requires the administration to utilize the contingency funds as necessary to maintain the SNAP program.
While the contingency funds may not fully cover SNAP for November, Talwani indicated that the administration has the option to authorize the transfer of additional funds to prevent any reductions in assistance.
These rulings underscore the critical role SNAP plays in the lives of millions of American families and highlight the ongoing legal and political challenges posed by the government shutdown. As developments unfold, the court will await the administration’s formal response by the designated deadline.
Mary Cunningham contributed to this report.