Judge rules administration can’t force states to undo delivery of SNAP benefits
Trump administration claim states were “unauthorized” A federal judge ruled Wednesday that granting full SNAP benefits starting over the weekend “is not based on actual records.”
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued a temporary restraining order barring the Trump administration from forcing states to “roll back” aid they began giving out over the weekend.
He also directed the administration to ensure that emergency funds for SNAP, which cover about 65% of November benefits, are available to states by Thursday.
Judge blocks administration from taking action to ‘roll back’ full SNAP benefits
With the government shutdown it’s coming to an endThe decision is unlikely to immediately change the status of the aid, although it gives a boost to Democratic state officials who have begun distributing the aid.
SNAP benefits will be paid in full once the shutdown is resolved, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday.
On Friday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, notified states that it was “working toward implementing November 2025 full benefit regulations” to comply with U.S. District Judge McConnell’s order from the Trump administration. fully fund SNAP with emergency funds.
Mario Tama/Getty Images – PHOTO: Free food boxes are distributed to those in need at a large-scale drive-thru food distribution at Exposition Park in response to the federal government shutdown and delays in SNAP/CalFresh food benefits in Los Angeles on November 11, 2025.
But the USDA backtracked the next day, telling states they must “immediately reverse steps taken to ensure full SNAP benefits for November 2025,” and the administration said all SNAP payments made by states were “unauthorized.”
In his ruling Wednesday, Judge Talwani said the Trump administration had “confused the record” by providing conflicting guidance.
“In light of these records, the court finds that USDA’s contention that the States engaged in ‘unauthorized’ action when they complied with a court order that had not yet been stayed and USDA’s own directive was not based on the factual record,” he wrote.
