A federal judge in Rhode Island on Friday prohibited the Trump administration from stopping the payments of SNAP benefits that assist in feeding 42 million Americans amid the U.S. government shutdown.
The oral decision made by Judge Jack McConnell mandated that the food stamp benefits be disbursed from emergency funds “as promptly as feasible,” occurring just a day before the administration planned to discontinue the assistance.
“It is indisputable, and it is irrefutable, that irreparable damage will commence if it hasn’t already begun, given the alarm it has instilled in some individuals concerning food funding availability for their families,” McConnell stated.
McConnell’s decision followed shortly after another federal judge in Boston, who is managing a separate yet similar lawsuit, indicated that the states participating as plaintiffs in that case were likely to demonstrate that the suspension of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits was “illegal.”
This judge, Indira Talwani, granted the administration until Monday to inform her if it would permit at least diminished SNAP benefits for November.
President Donald Trump, in a social media statement later on Friday, remarked, “Our Government attorneys believe we lack the legal authority to pay SNAP with certain funds we have on hand, and now two Courts have provided conflicting opinions regarding what we can and cannot do.”
“I do NOT want Americans to face hunger simply because the Radical Democrats refuse to act appropriately and REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “Therefore, I have directed our attorneys to seek clarification from the Court on how we can legally fund SNAP as soon as possible.”
“If the Court provides us with the proper legal guidance, it will be MY HONOR to ensure the funding, just as I did for Military and Law Enforcement Pay,” he expressed.
Attorneys representing the plaintiffs in McConnell’s case contended during a court session on Friday that terminating SNAP benefits was an “arbitrary and capricious action” that had created “a crisis” for Americans reliant on food stamps for nourishment.
A Justice Department attorney asserted that SNAP was no longer operational due to a lack of congressionally allocated funds resulting from the shutdown.
The lawyer, Tyler Becker, also insisted that it was up to the administration to decide whether to utilize up to $6 billion in contingency funds already designated by Congress to continue issuing SNAP benefits.
“There is no SNAP program, and consequently, the government cannot simply provide SNAP benefits,” Becker stated.
“A shutdown is not an emergency,” Becker remarked, asserting that if there was an emergency, it resulted from Congress failing to allocate funds to maintain government operations.
However, McConnell directed the administration to utilize the existing contingency funds to preserve at least some of the SNAP benefits that are typically disbursed.
The judge also stipulated that the administration must explore whether any other federal funds could be accessible to sustain the program in the absence of a funding bill from Congress.
McConnell’s ruling issued a temporary restraining order to the plaintiffs who lodged a lawsuit on Thursday in U.S. District Court in Providence against the Trump administration to uphold the benefits.
White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, during an interview Friday afternoon with NBC News’ “Meet the Press Now,” refrained from commenting on whether the Trump administration would comply with either court ruling.
“Today’s decision offers a lifeline to countless families, seniors, and veterans who rely on SNAP to provide meals for themselves,” the coalition of plaintiffs declared in a statement.
“It reasserts a core principle: no administration can weaponize hunger for political gain,” the coalition stated. “This triumph is about more than a single program — it embodies the American ideals of fairness, compassion, and accountability that unite our democracy.”
The plaintiffs encompass a collection of cities, charitable and faith-based organizations, unions, and business associations.
The Boston judge, Talwani, in her separate ruling on Friday, indicated that she was still evaluating the plaintiffs’ petition for a temporary restraining order to sustain the benefits.
However, she also mandated the administration to inform her by Monday if it would “authorize at least reduced SNAP benefits for November, and if so, their timeline for deciding whether to authorize only diminished SNAP benefits using the Contingency Funds or to approve full SNAP benefits utilizing both the Contingency Funds and additional available resources.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., commended both rulings.
“Excellent,” Schumer posted on the social media platform X.
“Trump’s initiative to cut off SNAP was spiteful and cruel,” Schumer stated.
“He attempted to create a hunger crisis to avoid addressing healthcare issues. No president in American history has terminated SNAP during a shutdown, not even Trump in his first term.”
Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council, criticized the rulings.
“We’re about to allocate emergency funds from the Department of Agriculture due to a ruling by a liberal judge with which we disagree,” Hassett stated in an interview on Fox News.
“However, we need those emergency funds in case of a hurricane or a food crisis,” Hassett noted. “Therefore, we must reopen the government as soon as possible. The Democrats lack a coherent plan.”
The Trump administration attributes the shutdown to Senate Democrats due to their unwillingness to support a short-term funding proposal put forth by House Republicans, which does not include an extension of enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies that Democrats advocate for.
