States Urge U.S. Judge to Block Trump Administration from Halting Food Benefits

BOSTON — A federal judge on Thursday began hearing arguments over whether President Donald Trump’s administration should be stopped from suspending food assistance for millions of Americans starting Saturday amid the ongoing government shutdown.

During the Boston hearing, attorneys for 25 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia asked U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani to order the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to use a $5.25 billion contingency fund to keep the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — commonly known as food stamps — running. Nearly 42 million low-income Americans depend on the program.

“Millions of Americans are about to lose benefits they’ve relied on for decades,” said Michelle Pascucci, an attorney from the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office. She argued that federal law requires the contingency fund to be used to maintain SNAP benefits, calling the administration’s refusal to do so “an abuse of discretion.”

Judge Talwani, appointed by former Democratic President Barack Obama, appeared skeptical of the Justice Department’s claim that contingency funds cannot be used for SNAP during a shutdown. “You have money available that can be used in this fiscal year,” she remarked during the hearing.

The USDA’s original shutdown plan, released last month, stated that contingency funds were available to continue SNAP payments if Congress failed to pass a spending bill to resolve the funding lapse that began October 1.

However, on Saturday, the department quietly updated its website, saying that no benefits would be issued on November 1, claiming “the well has run dry.” It would mark the first missed SNAP payment in the program’s 60-year history due to a government shutdown.

The coalition of states filed suit Tuesday, seeking a temporary restraining order that would require the USDA to continue payments in November. SNAP benefits are distributed monthly to households earning less than 130% of the federal poverty level — about $1,632 per month for a single person or $2,215 for a two-person household, depending on the state.

Democrats and Republicans in Congress have blamed each other for the shutdown and the growing risk that funding disruptions could halt SNAP payments altogether.

The USDA says it lacks sufficient funds to cover benefits for all 42 million recipients, estimating that the program costs $8.5 to $9 billion per month. But states including Massachusetts, California, Arizona, and Minnesota argue that available contingency funds should prevent any lapse. The law, they contend, requires those funds to be used to “carry out program operations as necessary.”

The states say halting benefits would be arbitrary and a violation of the statutes governing SNAP, which permit the USDA to stop payments only when no funding exists at all. “As long as Congress has appropriated funds that can be used for this purpose,” the states argue, “the department must continue making payments.”

They are not seeking a nationwide injunction but rather a ruling that would apply only to the plaintiff states.

In a late-night filing Wednesday, the Justice Department warned that ruling for the states would create “operational challenges” for the USDA and could deplete funds reserved for disaster food relief. It also argued that continuing full benefits during the shutdown would violate the Antideficiency Act, which bars federal agencies from spending money beyond what Congress has authorized.