By MICHAEL CASEY and GEOFF MULVIHILL, Associated Press

BOSTON (AP) — A federal judge in Boston on Thursday will consider a motion that would require the Trump administration to continue funding the SNAP food aid program despite the government shutdown.

Related Articles

US stocks slip as Wall Street sees both good and bad in Big Tech profits, US-China relations

Uber plans to offer autonomous taxi rides in San Francisco starting next year

Trump team takes aim at state laws shielding consumers’ credit scores from medical debt

Boeing says it is increasing push for replacements amid St. Louis strike

Undergarment upgrades bring many Mormon women comfort and joy

The hearing in front of U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani comes two days before the U.S. Department of Agriculture plans to freeze payments to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program because it said it can’t continue 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. Word in October that it would be a Nov. 1 casualty of the shutdown sent states, food banks and SNAP recipients scrambling to figure out how to secure food. Some states said they would spend their funds to keep versions of the program going.

The program costs around $8 billion per month.

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 that money would be tapped to keep SNAP running. The Democratic state attorneys general or governors from 25 states, as well as the District of Columbia, who challenged the administration’s plan argued that not only could that money be used, it must be. They also said a separate fund with around $23 billion could be tapped.

In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs argued that failing to maintain the SNAP funding was illegal, arbitrary and capricious, and would irreparably harm them. They also said cutting off the benefits would “cause deterioration of public health and well-being” of recipients, and that those costs would be borne by the states.

“With the suspension of SNAP benefits, the nutritional needs of millions of school aged children in Plaintiff States will not be met,” plaintiffs wrote. “Hungry children have a harder time paying attention, behaving, and learning in school. States will have to devote additional state resources, including healthcare expenditures and additional educational resources, to address these challenges.”

Plaintiffs also argued that more than 100,000 merchants in their states that rely on SNAP recipients would be harmed.

“With the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday, on information and belief, many of these retailers will have purchased a greater amount of food and inventory to match the holiday demand,” they wrote. “Without SNAP funds, SNAP recipients will not be able to frequent retailers, causing a significant loss in revenue, increased food waste, and a negative impact on Plaintiff States’ economies overall.”

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.

To qualify for SNAP in 2025, a family of four’s net income 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, according to the lawsuit.

Mulvihill reported from Haddonfield, New Jersey.

https://www.courant.com/2025/10/30/judge-snap-funding-government-case/