The Trump administration rushed to the Supreme Court late Friday to request a stay of a lower court’s order to pay full food stamp benefits in November.
The move came before the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals acted on an urgent appeal from the Trump administration. The appeals court denied the request for an administrative stay shortly after the Justice Department approached the high court, although the administration’s emergency appeal to the justices remains pending.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer asked the Supreme Court to grant a stay “by no later than 9:30 p.m. Friday,” so the administration would not have to make “an irretrievable transfer of billions of dollars” by the day’s end.
“Once those billions are out the door, there is no ready mechanism for the government to recover those funds — to the significant detriment of those other critical social programs whose budgets the district court ordered the government to raid,” Sauer wrote.
The Trump administration’s high court appeal will be directed initially to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who oversees emergency matters arising from the 1st Circuit. The Biden appointee could act on the stay request herself or refer the matter to the full court.
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program, which provides food aid for 42 million Americans, ran out of funding Nov. 1 for the first time in its history.
The appeals court noted in denying the immediate stay that the administration did not dispute its ability to tap into an account known as Section 32 for November SNAP benefits. The appeals court’s ruling Friday night was issued by Chief Judge David Barron, an Obama appointee, along with Judges Gustavo Gelpi and Julie Rikelman, both Biden appointees.
Justice Department attorneys filed an emergency motion at the 1st Circuit earlier Friday to stay a lower court’s order to fully fund SNAP benefits for November. The Trump administration has contended that fully funding the program could lead to budget problems for other child nutrition programs later this year.
“The government’s decision not to handicap one program to backstop another was eminently reasonable, not arbitrary and capricious,” Sauer wrote in the emergency appeal to the Supreme Court.
While waiting for an order Friday from the appeals court, USDA told states that it was working to comply with a lower court’s order to fund SNAP for November, as POLITICO first reported. Some states have already administered benefits with the funds USDA previously made available, but it’s not clear what will happen to that money as the court case continues.
Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul confirmed Friday their administrations would move forward with paying full benefits.
States, local governments and nonprofits have rapidly assembled initiatives to fill the gap left by the lapse in SNAP benefits. But anti-hunger advocates have warned that it isn’t enough to meet the needs of low-income families who have relied on the program.
Administration officials previously agreed to comply with two separate court orders to dip into a SNAP contingency fund, which has enough money to administer partial November benefits. But partial benefits are more difficult for states to administer, and federal and state officials have said it could delay the funds by weeks or even months.
Attorney General Pam Bondi said U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr.’s order threatened to sway congressional negotiations to reopen the government.
“Judicial activism at its worst,” she wrote in a post on X slamming McConnell, an Obama appointee. “A single district court in Rhode Island should not be able to seize center stage in the shutdown, seek to upend political negotiations that could produce swift political solutions for SNAP and other programs, and dictate its own preferences for how scarce federal funds should be spent.”
