A coalition of attorneys general and governors from 25 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia filed a federal lawsuit on Tuesday against the Trump administration, challenging its decision to withhold funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) amid the ongoing government shutdown. The suit accuses the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) of unlawfully refusing to access nearly $6 billion in contingency funds, which could sustain benefits for approximately 25 million participants in the affected jurisdictions.

The USDA announced that SNAP funding will cease starting in November, as the congressional budget impasse marks its one-month anniversary since the fiscal year began on October 1, 2025. The plaintiffs argue that the administration's interpretation of the law is erroneous, asserting that Congress intended the contingency reserves to maintain the program during funding lapses. States, which administer SNAP benefits, emphasize that the cutoff would exacerbate food insecurity for low-income households reliant on the program for monthly grocery purchases.

In a subsequent filing, the state officials requested an immediate temporary restraining order to halt the suspension of funds and compel the USDA to remove all barriers to deploying the reserves. The order would mandate that federal officials take every necessary action to ensure continuity in the suing jurisdictions. U.S. District Judge in Boston has scheduled a hearing for October 30. Nationwide, SNAP supports more than 42 million individuals across 22 million households, according to government data.

Also Read: North Korea Launches Nuclear-Capable Cruise Missiles Ahead of Trump’s Asia Trip

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, leading the case in Boston's federal court, condemned the administration's stance in a statement: “Despite having the money to fund SNAP, the Trump Administration is creating needless fear, angst and harm for millions of families and their children especially as we approach the holidays.” The USDA countered that the funds are restricted to supplementing existing appropriations and cannot be used absent a new spending bill, citing potential uses like aid for the approaching Category 5 Hurricane Melissa in Florida.

The dispute intensifies partisan tensions in a Republican-controlled Congress, where Senate procedural rules require Democratic cooperation to advance legislation. Senate Democrats have conditioned support on renewing expiring health insurance subsidies, prompting mutual recriminations. The USDA's website now features a prominent banner attributing the lapse in “critical nutrition assistance” to Democrats, describing it as “an inflection point” for the party. Meanwhile, the American Federation of Government Employees urged a short-term funding resolution, with President Everett Kelley decrying the “unacceptable” plight of unpaid or furloughed workers due to Washington’s political deadlock.

This legal challenge underscores the broader ramifications of the shutdown, which has left federal employees without paychecks and strained social safety nets. Although the USDA's initial contingency plan referenced SNAP support during lapses, revised guidance deems the funds unavailable for that purpose. As the case—Massachusetts v. Department of Agriculture, docket 25-cv-13165—unfolds, it could force a reevaluation of executive authority over vital programs, potentially averting widespread hardship for vulnerable populations.

Also Read: ‘No Path for That’: Speaker Johnson Rejects Speculation Over Trump Third Term