Federal Courts Step In to Force Funding of SNAP During Government Shutdown
- contactbehindthesh
- Nov 1
- 2 min read
The ongoing government shutdown has created an emergency for the nation's largest anti-hunger initiative, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). With funding set to expire, the Trump administration announced they would not use available contingency funds, meaning the crucial monthly benefits for nearly 42 million Americans were scheduled to stop entirely beginning on November 1. This unprecedented move would have triggered a widespread food insecurity crisis across the country, affecting countless low-income families who rely on SNAP to purchase groceries. Since the suspension of the program had never occurred in its decades-long history, immediate and intense public backlash and legal action sparked.
The controversy quickly moved to the federal courts after a coalition of over two dozen states and Washington D.C. filed a lawsuit challenging the administration’s refusal to tap into the emergency money. The legal fight centered on the USDA’s interpretation of existing law, with the administration claiming they were legally barred from using the contingency funds during a government funding lapse. The case was put before U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston, who held a pivotal hearing on the matter. During the proceedings, Judge Talwani expressed strong reservations about the administration’s position, stating that Congress had specifically set aside billions of dollars in a contingency fund for such emergencies. She pressed the federal lawyers on why they were refusing to use this reserve money, telling them it was "hard for me to understand how this isn't an emergency when there's no money and a lot of people are needing their SNAP benefits."
The judicial intervention culminated with Judge Talwani issuing a formal order that provided immediate relief to millions. She ruled the administration's plan to suspend all payments was unlawful and legally required the USDA to use the emergency contingency fund to maintain at least partial operations of the program. A federal judge in Rhode Island issued a similar order, creating a united legal front against the administration's policy. This powerful mandate successfully blocked the catastrophic cutoff of food aid that had been scheduled to begin the very next day. While this court action averted the worst-case scenario, the issue is not entirely resolved, as the available contingency fund, estimated at around $5.3 billion, is not enough to cover the program’s total monthly cost, which typically runs between $8.5 billion and $9 billion. This means that although a full lapse was prevented, many recipients will still likely receive reduced payments for November.
Furthermore, a major issue remains regarding the logistics of distribution. Because the administration had previously instructed states to halt their preparation for November payments, the process of re-starting the flow of funds to the states will take time. This means that despite the favorable ruling, many SNAP recipients should still expect their November payments to be delayed, sometimes for a week or more, as state agencies scramble to get the systems working again. While the court’s decision offers an important temporary measure to keep people fed, the long-term solution requires political action. The full stability and funding of the SNAP program will ultimately depend on Congress successfully negotiating an end to the government shutdown and passing a bill to appropriate the full funds needed for this essential safety net.
Sources:
Comments