Two federal judges have ruled that the Trump administration cannot pull the plug on food aid for millions of Americans amid the ongoing government shutdown, directing officials to tap into contingency funds to keep benefits flowing.
The rulings, delivered from courts in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, came as the administration prepared to suspend the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) beginning November 1. The program, commonly known as food stamps, provides essential aid to low-income households across the country.
Both judges ordered the government to explain by Monday how it intends to comply with the rulings, leaving uncertainty over whether benefits would reach recipients on time.
President Trump, addressing the issue online, claimed that the federal government might not have the legal authority to distribute SNAP benefits during the shutdown. He said his legal team was seeking guidance from the courts, adding that if permitted, “it will be my honor to provide the funding.”
SNAP supports Americans earning below 130% of the federal poverty threshold—around $1,632 a month for one person or $2,215 for two. States administer the program locally, but federal funds are the lifeline that keeps it running.
Judges Reject ‘Arbitrary’ Refusal to Use Available Funds
U.S. District Judge John McConnell in Rhode Island called the administration’s refusal to draw from the $5.25 billion contingency fund “arbitrary,” warning that millions faced “irreparable harm” as food insecurity loomed. He ordered that the money be released “as soon as possible,” and suggested the government could explore an additional $23 billion pool if necessary.
In Boston, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued a parallel ruling in a case brought by 25 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia. She found that the government’s decision to suspend SNAP payments was based on “an erroneous conclusion” that the contingency fund could not be used during the shutdown.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which oversees SNAP, has said it lacks funds to pay full benefits to the 42 million Americans who depend on the program each month—costing roughly $8.5 to $9 billion. Officials claimed they were legally barred from using the emergency funds until Congress approved a spending bill.
Administration Pushes Back
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins dismissed claims that the USDA had funds available as “a lie,” asserting that contingency reserves could only be accessed with congressional authorization. Justice Department attorneys also warned the courts that any attempt to issue partial or improvised payments could destabilize the system, citing outdated state-level technology.
But both judges concluded that the administration retained the discretion to act. As Judge McConnell put it, the harm of inaction outweighed the bureaucratic hesitation: “There is no doubt and it is beyond argument that irreparable harm will begin to occur if it hasn’t already.”
With hunger concerns mounting and political blame ricocheting between the White House and Congress, the rulings now force the administration to decide whether to comply—or escalate the standoff into another legal showdown over the nation’s food safety net.
