In a dramatic courtroom showdown on the eve of a potential catastrophe for millions of American families, two federal judges on Friday handed stinging defeats to the Trump administration, mandating the use of emergency funds to keep the nation’s food stamp program alive during the grinding government shutdown.

The rulings came just hours before benefits for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) were set to evaporate on Saturday, leaving up to 42 million low-income Americans—one in eight nationwide—scrambling for their next meal.

The decisions, issued in federal courts in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, forced the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to tap into a $5 billion contingency reserve to cover at least partial November payments, rejecting the administration’s claims that it lacked the legal authority to do so.

The FrankNez Media Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.

For families already stretched thin by inflation and stagnant wages, the orders offered a sliver of hope amid the partisan deadlock that’s kept the government shuttered for 31 days.

U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell in Providence, Rhode Island, didn’t mince words during Friday’s hearing. From the bench, he directed the USDA to “distribute” SNAP aid “as soon as possible” using the emergency funds, and potentially other sources, while demanding an update by Monday noon on how it would comply.

The judge’s temporary restraining order came in response to a lawsuit filed Thursday by a coalition of nonprofits, cities, unions, and small businesses, who argued the administration’s refusal to act was plunging the program into unnecessary crisis.

In Boston, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama appointee, took a slightly more measured approach but still ruled the administration’s plan to withhold benefits “unlawful.”

She gave officials until Monday, November 3, to explain whether they’d provide full or partial funding, declining an immediate restraining order but affirming that the USDA must use the contingency money to avoid “irreparable harm” to recipients.

“Congress put money in an emergency fund, and it is hard for me to understand how this is not an emergency,” Talwani remarked during Thursday’s hearing, expressing skepticism toward Justice Department lawyers who insisted the shutdown rendered SNAP effectively nonexistent.

President Donald Trump Steps In

President Trump, reacting swiftly on Truth Social, struck a tone of reluctant compliance laced with familiar finger-pointing.

“I do NOT want Americans to go hungry just because the Radical Democrats refuse to do the right thing and REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT,” he wrote. “Therefore, I have instructed our lawyers to ask the Court to clarify how we can legally fund SNAP as soon as possible. If we are given the appropriate legal direction by the Court, it will BE MY HONOR to provide the funding, just like I did with Military and Law Enforcement Pay.”

Earlier in the day, speaking to reporters in Palm Beach, Florida, Trump had blamed Senate Democrats outright, saying they “had to do was sign” a funding bill to avert the lapse.

The White House and USDA had no immediate comment on the rulings, but Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins had been vocal in recent days about the bind.

On Friday, she told reporters the government “is failing you,” echoing a memo from last month where the department initially planned to use the contingency funds but reversed course amid the funding standoff.

The USDA’s website now features a stark banner: no benefits will issue on November 1, though it blames Democrats for voting against funding 12 times.

“Suspending SNAP is Suspending a Lifeline”

This isn’t the first time SNAP has been caught in the crossfire of Washington’s dysfunction. The program, rebranded from “food stamps” in 2008 to reduce stigma, has been a mandatory spending priority since the 1960s, designed to weather shutdowns with its multiyear reserves.

But the Trump administration’s abrupt October 10 letter to states—warning of “insufficient funds” for full November benefits—sparked widespread alarm.

October payments went out as usual, but the $8.5 billion to $9 billion monthly tab for November loomed large, with the $5 billion reserve covering only about half.

The crisis traces back to the shutdown’s roots: a September 30 failure to pass a 2026 fiscal year budget, exacerbated by Democratic demands to reverse GOP cuts to the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid in exchange for a clean funding bill.

Republicans, including Trump, have pushed back, with the president earlier this week floating a vague promise aboard Air Force One that “we’re going to get it done” on SNAP, without specifics.

But the legal salvos didn’t stop with Friday’s orders. On Tuesday, attorneys general from 25 states and D.C., plus governors from Kansas, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania, sued the USDA in Boston, arguing federal law compels continued payments during lapses.

A separate suit from 22 states and D.C. echoed the plea, seeking a temporary order to unlock the funds.

“Suspending SNAP due to the shutdown is suspending a lifeline,” Oregon State Treasurer Elizabeth Steiner told reporters, highlighting how every prior administration—Republican or Democrat—had kept the spigot open.

Trending

Pelosi Is Now Calling for The Arrest of ICE Agents

States Declare ‘State of Emergency’

As the rulings filtered out, states weren’t waiting for federal action. New York Governor Kathy Hochul declared a state of emergency Thursday, mobilizing resources to bolster food banks.

newsweek.com Virginia Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin announced a $37.5 million weekly state-funded program to load EBT cards starting November 3 for October recipients.

Oregon’s governor earmarked $5 million for food banks, while Minnesota’s Tim Walz funneled $4 million to pantries, and South Carolina activated a post-hurricane charity fund.

Pennsylvania and New Jersey issued stark warnings: benefits halted until the shutdown ends, with EBT usability in doubt after October 31.

Food banks, already reeling from doubled demand since the pandemic and a $1 billion federal cut to local farmer purchases earlier this year, braced for a surge.

In Miami, lines snaked around Curley’s House Food Bank on Thursday, with volunteers sorting beans and powdered milk for furloughed federal workers and SNAP families.

Retailers like Walmart and Albertsons warned of ripple effects: SNAP accounts for 3.6% of in-store grocery trips this year, down from pandemic highs but still vital, and a lapse could shave 1.5% to 2% off industry sales.

This shutdown’s SNAP drama caps a tougher year for the program under Trump. The president’s “One Big Beautiful Act,” signed in July, marked the deepest cuts in SNAP’s 86-year history, projected to strip benefits from 2.4 million people monthly through 2034 by expanding work requirements to parents of teens, adults up to 64, and veterans.

The Congressional Budget Office pegged the losses lower than initial House proposals but still seismic: families with kids, for the first time, facing mandatory work, volunteer, or training mandates to keep aid.

Critics like the Food Research & Action Center slammed it as the administration playing “food police” instead of investing in jobs — which have been demolished in America by Trump’s aggressive deportation policies, ridding the economy of day laborers.

What Comes Next?

Even as judges stepped in, uncertainties lingered. Reloading EBT cards could take one to two weeks and appeals seem likely—potentially dragging out the pain.

The Senate, adjourned until Monday’s 34th shutdown day, shows no sign of breakthrough, with Democrats holding firm on health care protections and Republicans eyeing a standalone SNAP patch.

For recipients like single mothers in rural Georgia or urban veterans in Chicago—many with no income or scraping by on less than $2,900 monthly for a family of three—the stakes feel personal.

As one Feeding Texas executive noted, any delay means families “skip or cut back on meals or choose to pay rent over food.”

Senator Bernie Sanders, seizing on the rulings, demanded the administration “must obey the law.”

Friday’s verdicts buy time, but as the shutdown stretches into its second month, the real question is whether lawmakers will finally swallow their pride—or if hunger will become the next bargaining chip.

Also Read: A DOJ Whistleblower Now Makes Revelation That Undermines the Judicial System’s Integrity

Contact | About | Home