Federal Judge Orders Full SNAP Benefits Amid Government Shutdown

A federal judge in Rhode Island has ordered the Trump administration to fully fund Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for November, reversing an earlier plan to provide only 65% of the maximum benefit due to the ongoing government shutdown. U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell Jr. criticized the administration for not considering the severe impact on the 42 million Americans who rely on SNAP, especially children. The administration quickly filed an appeal, maintaining that only Congress can allocate the necessary funds and that remaining reserves were needed for other programs.

The legal challenge was initiated by a coalition of cities, nonprofits, and several Democratic state officials, concerned that partial payments could result in some recipients receiving nothing. Judge McConnell emphasized that the administration failed to comply with a previous court order to issue payments efficiently and by a set deadline. The administration initially proposed a partial payment, then recalculated it to 65%, amid threats to cut SNAP entirely if Democrats did not reopen the government. The controversy highlights the broader clash over government funding and the political use of essential services like food assistance during shutdowns. The timeline for full benefit distribution remains uncertain due to state system delays.

In a related development, the administration planned to use only $4.65 billion of a $5.25 billion emergency fund, resulting in a 35% cut to individual SNAP benefits, and it has appealed the ruling. The administration blamed Senate Democrats for repeatedly blocking a Republican stopgap funding bill. However, Judge McConnell criticized the USDA for not addressing administrative burdens, such as outdated state computer systems, which would delay the implementation of reduced benefits. He emphasized the need to use a $23.35 billion tariff fund to ensure full payments. Democratic-led states, supported by legal advocacy groups, had brought lawsuits in Boston and Providence, citing administrative infeasibility and the harm caused by benefit lapses. The judge condemned the administration's actions as deliberate defiance of court orders and stressed the unprecedented nature of the lapse in SNAP benefits.