Supreme Court Halts Order for Full SNAP Benefits Under Trump
The U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a lower court’s ruling that would have forced the Trump administration to continue full Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic. The stay, issued on Monday, freezes a nationwide injunction requiring expanded food aid for millions of Americans.
Why Did the Legal Fight Over SNAP Benefits Start?
The dispute began when advocacy groups and multiple states sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for ending a 15% emergency SNAP boost in late 2020. The increase, approved under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, was meant to help families struggling during the pandemic.
The Trump administration argued that the extra aid was no longer needed as the economy improved, but critics, including food security organizations and Democratic leaders, warned the cut would worsen hunger. In October 2021, a federal judge ruled the USDA’s move “arbitrary and capricious” and ordered full benefits restored.
Although the Biden administration later reinstated the increase, the legal challenge over the Trump-era policy continued, leading to the Supreme Court’s intervention.
What Does the Supreme Court’s Stay Mean?
The Court’s order doesn’t decide the case’s merits but pauses the lower court’s injunction while appeals proceed. Legal experts say the move hints at skepticism over whether courts can mandate federal spending decisions.
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, representing the Biden administration, argued the issue was moot since benefits were already restored. However, the Court’s decision suggests it sees broader legal questions about judicial power over executive spending.
How Does This Affect Families and Policy?
While current SNAP recipients keep enhanced benefits under Biden’s policies, advocates fear the Court’s pause could weaken future challenges to aid cuts.
Abby Leibman, MAZON President:
“This jeopardizes food security for vulnerable families. Courts must protect safety nets, especially during economic instability.”
Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.), House Agriculture Committee:
“Judges shouldn’t control spending—that’s Congress’s role.”
Next Steps in the Legal Battle
The case now heads to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, with possible Supreme Court review later. The ruling could shape how courts oversee emergency spending decisions.
With midterms nearing, SNAP remains a political flashpoint—Democrats aim to expand aid, while Republicans demand fiscal restraint. Meanwhile, families relying on food assistance await a final decision that could impact their survival.
Stay updated with NextMinuteNews for ongoing coverage.
