A federal appeals court has delivered a major legal setback to the Trump administration by preventing the suspension of food-stamp payments during the ongoing government shutdown. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the administration cannot halt Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits while the shutdown continues.
Conflicting Decisions in Lower Courts
The appeals court’s ruling follows a series of contradictory decisions in lower courts. Earlier in the week, U.S. The District Judge had sided with the administration, allowing the White House budget office to temporarily halt SNAP payments. Hours later, however, the Judge issued a temporary restraining order in a related case, stopping any immediate cuts to benefits. That order was scheduled to expire on Friday, leaving recipients uncertain about their aid.
States Challenge Administration
The Trump administration argued that without a congressional appropriation, the Agriculture Department lacked the legal authority to continue issuing SNAP benefits, citing the Antideficiency Act, which forbids federal spending without approved funding. In response, nearly a dozen states-including California, New York, and Pennsylvania-filed lawsuits seeking to maintain the payments. These states argued that cutting off food assistance would cause serious harm to residents who rely on the program.
Impact on Millions of Americans
SNAP supports roughly 42 million Americans and is funded federally while being administered by the states. The program faced the first potential nationwide suspension since its creation in 1977. The appeals court ruling ensures that November benefits, many of which were already distributed early due to the shutdown threat, will remain intact. Future payments are also protected while the legal battle continues.
Political and Legal Implications
This decision represents a key development in the ongoing government shutdown, now in its third week. While the appeals court did not rule on the ultimate legality of suspending SNAP benefits, it determined that the harm to beneficiaries outweighed the government’s interest in immediately stopping payments. The case is expected to continue through the courts, with possible further appeals shaping the future of federal food assistance.
