Two federal judges on Friday ordered the Trump administration to use emergency funds to keep the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) running, offering temporary relief to millions of Americans whose benefits were set to expire on November 1.
The rulings, issued almost simultaneously in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, direct the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to allocate contingency funds to sustain at least partial benefits while litigation continues.
The SNAP program—commonly known as food stamps—has become one of the central flashpoints in the ongoing government shutdown, now entering its fifth week. Funding for the program lapsed on October 1 after Congress failed to pass appropriations for the new fiscal year.
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins had previously announced that benefits for the program’s 42 million recipients would be cut off at the start of November, drawing swift legal challenges from a coalition of 25 states and the District of Columbia.
Those states, all led by Democratic governors or attorneys general, argued that the administration was legally obligated to use USDA emergency funds to maintain food assistance. In back-to-back decisions, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Massachusetts and Judge John McConnell in Rhode Island—both appointed by former President Barack Obama—agreed with the plaintiffs’ position.
“The shutdown of the government through funding doesn’t do away with SNAP, it just does away with the funding of it,” McConnell said from the bench. His ruling compels the USDA to release contingency funds “timely or as soon as possible,” a move that could stave off an immediate lapse in assistance for low-income families.
The USDA’s emergency fund currently contains about $5.3 billion, less than the $9 billion required to fully cover monthly benefits nationwide. Judge Talwani, in a 15-page opinion, encouraged the administration to “supplement” the contingency account “by authorizing a transfer of additional funds…to avoid any reductions” in SNAP payments.
While the rulings ensure that some benefits will continue, recipients could face delays as the USDA and state agencies work to restart payment systems. Talwani noted that the government must respond by November 3 with details on whether it plans to authorize reduced or full benefits and what timeline it will follow.
Her order did not leave room for the administration to continue refusing to fund the program, and she wrote that the plaintiffs “are likely to succeed on their claim that Defendants’ suspension of SNAP benefits is unlawful.” If the government fails to act by Monday, she indicated she would impose a temporary restraining order compelling immediate payment.
The decisions add new legal pressure to an already fraught political standoff in Washington. Republicans have largely maintained unity during the shutdown fight, insisting that long-term fiscal responsibility requires rethinking how federal aid programs are structured.
But with millions of Americans facing hunger and food banks already overwhelmed, the rulings underscore the political and humanitarian costs of a prolonged impasse.
For now, the judges’ orders ensure that, at least partially, food assistance will continue—though how long those funds last, and whether Congress acts to replenish them, remains uncertain.
[READ MORE: FBI Foils Halloween Terror Plot in Michigan, Arrests Multiple Suspects]
