Federal Judge Orders Trump Administration to Use Contingency Funds for SNAP Benefits During Shutdown
A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration must use contingency funds to provide at least partial SNAP benefits during the government shutdown. Judge Indira Talwani rejected the government's argument that a $5 billion contingency fund could not legally be used, stating that the administration is 'statutorily mandated' to use these funds. The ruling affects approximately 42 million Americans who rely on SNAP benefits for food assistance, with the government given until November 3rd to report back on its plans.
A federal judge has delivered a significant ruling in the ongoing government shutdown crisis, ordering the Trump administration to utilize contingency funds to maintain Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for millions of Americans. The decision comes as the shutdown entered its 31st day, threatening essential food assistance for vulnerable populations across the nation.
Legal Mandate for SNAP Funding
In a decisive 15-page order, Judge Indira Talwani of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts firmly rejected the administration's position that the $5 billion contingency fund could not be used during the appropriations lapse. The judge stated that "Defendants are statutorily mandated to use the previously appropriated SNAP contingency reserve when necessary" and also have discretion to use other previously appropriated funds. This ruling directly challenges the administration's interpretation of funding restrictions.
Immediate Impact and Timeline
While Judge Talwani stopped short of ordering immediate SNAP payments, she gave the government until Monday, November 3rd, to report back to the court regarding their plans for authorizing at least reduced benefits for November. The timing is critical, as the Trump administration had previously stated that money for the program was due to expire on Saturday, potentially leaving millions without essential food assistance.
Scope of the Ruling
The legal action originated from a lawsuit filed by two dozen states and the District of Columbia, who argued that cutting off SNAP payments was unlawful and threatened public health. Approximately 42 million Americans depend on SNAP benefits, with recipients typically receiving an average of $187 monthly on prepaid cards. For many families, these benefits represent their primary source of food funding, making the court's intervention crucial for preventing widespread food insecurity.
Administration's Position Challenged
Judge Talwani specifically addressed and rejected the administration's legal argument that "the contingency fund can only flow when the underlying fund is flowing." In her ruling, she noted that "Congress placed no such restrictions in the 2024 Consolidated Appropriations Act," directly contradicting the position taken by Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and other administration officials. This legal clarification provides a foundation for continued SNAP funding during the shutdown period.
The court's decision represents a significant development in the ongoing government shutdown, ensuring that essential nutritional assistance remains available to millions of Americans while political negotiations continue. The ruling underscores the legal obligations of government agencies to maintain critical services even during appropriations lapses, setting an important precedent for future shutdown scenarios.
