- Twenty-five states and D.C. sued the USDA seeking emergency release of up to $6 billion to prevent a nationwide SNAP benefits suspension affecting 42 million people.
- Plaintiffs argue the USDA illegally refused contingency funds required by the Food and Nutrition Act; a court hearing and emergency ruling are sought before November.
BOSTON — With the federal government shutdown stretching into its 28th day, a coalition of Democratic attorneys general and governors from 25 states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit Tuesday in U.S. District Court here, demanding the Trump administration tap up to $6 billion in contingency reserves to keep the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) afloat for November.
The suit accuses the U.S. Department of Agriculture of violating federal law by refusing to use funds Congress explicitly set aside for emergencies, a move that could leave 42 million low-income Americans — including one in eight nationwide — without food assistance starting Saturday, marking the first nationwide suspension of SNAP benefits in the program’s 60-year history.
The FrankNez Media Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.
SNAP, once known as food stamps, provides about $8 billion monthly to help eligible households buy groceries, serving families with children, seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities.
The plaintiffs, led by Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell alongside counterparts from California, Arizona, Minnesota, and New York, argue the USDA’s decision contravenes the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, which requires that “assistance under this program shall be furnished to all eligible households” as long as funds are available.
The lawsuit seeks an emergency ruling by Friday to compel the release of at least 60% of November’s benefits, based on estimates from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
The filing highlights a stark policy reversal: As recently as September 30, the USDA’s contingency plan noted that multi-year reserves could cover SNAP “in the event that a lapse occurs in the middle of the fiscal year.”
But on October 24, a department memo instructed states to suspend all November payments, claiming the funds are reserved for disasters like hurricanes, not shutdowns.
“The federal government has the money to continue funding SNAP benefits — they’re choosing to harm millions of families across the country already struggling to make ends meet,” Campbell said in a social media post announcing the suit.
One Big Ugly Bill Act?
This legal challenge unfolds amid broader strains on the safety net.
Earlier this year, Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” signed July 4, slashed SNAP funding by $186 billion through 2034, tightening work requirements and eligibility that the Congressional Budget Office projects will eliminate benefits for up to 22.3 million households, with average losses of $146 monthly for those affected.
Anti-hunger groups report a 20% surge in food bank demand this year, fueled by 17.8% grocery inflation since early 2022 and labor shortages linked to immigration crackdowns.
In Virginia, Jane Colony Mills, executive director of the Loaves & Fishes food bank in Charlottesville, described the toll: “We’ve experienced a 20% increase in the numbers of people coming for food assistance in 2025, likely driven not only by the cost of groceries in our community, but by the overall cost of living in Charlottesville and Albemarle area.
Battling hunger is no longer a priority.”
States are scrambling to fill gaps. California Governor Gavin Newsom, a plaintiff, deployed the National Guard and California Volunteers to aid food banks, fast-tracking $80 million in state aid and calling the federal stance “cruel.”
“While Donald Trump parades around the world trying to repair the economic damage he’s done with his incompetence, he’s denying food to millions of Americans who will go hungry next month. It’s cruel and speaks to his basic lack of humanity,” Newsom said October 28.
Vermont Republican Governor Phil Scott, joining the bipartisan push, warned October 27: “This could cause catastrophic disruption for more than 63,000 Vermonters relying on these benefits every month, including low-income families, veterans, older citizens, and people living with disabilities.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James added: “Millions of Americans are about to go hungry because the federal government has chosen to withhold food assistance it is legally obligated to provide.”
In North Carolina, Attorney General Jeff Jackson, another lead plaintiff, spotlighted rural impacts during a Raleigh press conference: “The truth is, Congress gave [the Agriculture Department] a $6 billion emergency fund to use in situations like this.
If Congress gives a department money to fund a program, that department cannot refuse to fund that program.”
Nearly 600,000 U.S. Children Are at Risk
One in six residents in the state’s rural counties depends on SNAP, with over 580,000 children and 40,000 infants at risk.
Arizona officials, facing disruptions for 855,000 residents including 347,000 children, are eyeing National Guard help and a special session for emergency dollars.
The USDA, led by Secretary Brooke Rollins, maintains the reserves can’t legally supplant regular funding.
“We don’t even have close to that in contingency funding,” Rollins said in a CNN interview Tuesday, estimating November’s full cost at $9.2 billion.
“We’ve got to get this government open.”
A department spokesperson countered the suit: “We are approaching an inflection point for Senate Democrats. Continue to hold out for the Far-Left wing of the party or reopen the government so mothers, babies, and the most vulnerable among us can receive timely WIC and SNAP allotments.”
The White House echoed the blame game in an October 27 X post: “Over 40 million Americans face the risk of losing critical SNAP food benefits. This crisis could be resolved if Democrats prioritized the needs of the American people over political games.”
An Office of Management and Budget spokesperson added: “Democrats chose to shut down the government knowing full well that SNAP would soon run out of funds. It doesn’t have to be this way, and it’s sad they are using the families who rely on it as pawns.”
The shutdown, sparked October 1 over border security and spending disputes, has reprogrammed funds for military pay and WIC’s 6.7 million participants via a $300 million transfer, but left SNAP in limbo — a selectivity critics decry as punitive.
In New Jersey, where nearly 800,000 residents including 1 million across plaintiff states rely on the program, single mother Hannah Mann of Merchantville told reporters her family, already juggling utilities and gig work amid her husband’s year-long unemployment, fears the worst.
“The government shutdown is not an abstract political fight,” she said, highlighting how even loaded October benefits might expire post-November 1.
So, What’s Next?
Food banks, already stretched, brace for surges.
Virginia’s Federation of Virginia Food Banks executive director Eddie Oliver warned: “We are collectively Virginia’s largest charitable response to hunger,” but can’t absorb a full SNAP halt.
Legal observers peg the suit’s success on proving the USDA’s shift “arbitrary and capricious,” bolstered by the act’s language and past shutdown precedents.
A hearing is set for October 30, but with clocks ticking, advocates fear a November without nets.
As Jackson put it, “They are looking to ratchet up the pain in an already painful moment. This is wrong, and it’s against the law.”
Also Read: A DOJ Whistleblower Now Makes Revelation That Undermines the Judicial System’s Integrity
