Judges order the Trump administration to use contingency funds for SNAP payments during the shutdown

The rulings came a day before the U.S. Department of Agriculture planned to freeze payments to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program because it said it could no longer keep funding it due to the shutdown.

The program serves about 1 in 8 Americans and is a major piece of the nation's social safety net — and it costs about $8 billion per month nationally.

Democratic state attorneys general or governors from 25 states, as well as the District of Columbia, challenged the plan to pause the program, contending that the administration has a legal obligation to keep it running in their jurisdictions.

The administration said it wasn't allowed to use a contingency fund with about $5 billion in it for the program, which reversed a USDA plan from before the shutdown that said money would be tapped to keep SNAP running. The Democratic officials argued that not only could that money be used, but it must be. They also said a separate fund with around $23 billion is available for the cause.

In Providence, Rhode Island, U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell ruled from the bench in a case filed by cities and nonprofits that the program must be funded using at least the contingency funds, and he asked for an update on progress by Monday.

Along with ordering the federal government to use emergency reserves to backfill SNAP benefits, McConnell ruled that all previous work requirement waivers must continue to be honored. The USDA during the shutdown has terminated existing waivers that exempted work requirements for older adults, veterans and others.

"The court's ruling protects millions of families, seniors, and veterans from being used as leverage in a political fight and upholds the principle that no one in America should go hungry," Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, said of the Rhode Island decision.

There were similar elements in the Boston case, where U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani ruled in a written opinion that the USDA has to pay for SNAP, calling the suspension "unlawful." She ordered the federal government to advise the court by Monday as to whether they will use the contingency funds to provide reduced SNAP benefits for November or fully fund the program "using both contingency funds and additional available funds.

"Defendants' suspension of SNAP payments was based on the erroneous conclusion that the Contingency Funds could not be used to ensure continuation of SNAP payments," she wrote. "This court has now clarified that Defendants are required to use those Contingency Funds as necessary for the SNAP program."

It wasn't immediately clear how quickly the debit cards that beneficiaries use to buy groceries could be reloaded after the ruling. That process often takes one to two weeks.

The rulings are likely to face appeals.

States, food banks and SNAP recipients have been bracing for an abrupt shift in how low-income people can get groceries. Advocates and beneficiaries say halting the food aid would force people to choose between buying groceries and paying other bills.

The majority of states have announced more or expedited funding for food banks or novel ways to load at least some benefits onto the debit cards used in the program.

At a Washington news conference earlier Friday, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, whose department runs SNAP, said the contingency funds in question would not cover the cost of SNAP for long. Speaking at a press conference with House Speaker Mike Johnson at the Capitol, she blamed Democrats for conducting a "disgusting dereliction of duty" by refusing to end their Senate filibuster as they hold out for an extension of health care funds.

A push this week to continue SNAP funding during the shutdown failed in Congress.

To qualify for SNAP in 2025, a family of four's net income after certain expenses can't exceed the federal poverty line, which is about $31,000 per year. Last year, SNAP provided assistance to 41 million people, nearly two-thirds of whom were families with children.