States administering a federal food aid program serving about 42 million Americans faced uncertainty on Monday over whether they can — and should — provide full monthly benefits during an ongoing legal battle involving the U.S. government shutdown.
President Trump’s administration demanded that states “undo” full benefits that were paid under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) during a brief window between federal court rulings.
A federal appeals court is considering whether to impose a longer halt to the full benefits, while Congress debates the inclusion of SNAP funding in a proposal to resolve the government shutdown.
Some states have cautioned about “catastrophic operational disruptions” if they do not receive reimbursements for already authorized SNAP benefits. Meanwhile, there are reports of states utilizing federal funds or their own resources to load electronic benefit cards for recipients.
Millions Receive Aid While Others Wait
The administration initially announced that SNAP benefits would not be available in November due to the shutdown. Following lawsuits from certain states and nonprofit organizations, judges ruled that benefits could not be skipped entirely for November.
As a result, the administration proposed that 65% of the maximum monthly benefit be funded from an emergency reserve. This was deemed insufficient by U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell, who ordered full funding for SNAP by Friday.
Consequently, some states quickly ordered their vendors to provide full monthly benefits, allowing millions to receive funds before the legal decisions froze those benefits.
However, millions of others have not received their payments for November as states awaited guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
States Fighting to Preserve SNAP Benefits
The Trump administration accused states of acting hastily by issuing SNAP benefits in violation of legal orders. Officials warned of potential penalties for states that do not comply with federal demands.
In Wisconsin, for example, the state’s quick action resulted in a freeze on federal reimbursements, potentially depleting available funds and complicating the distribution process.
Some state governors, particularly Democrats, have pledged to resist any federal attempts to retract funds. Connecticut's Gov. Ned Lamont emphasized the importance of not taking back benefits already distributed, asserting that those in need must be shielded from political disputes.
