Well, you may say yes, but the Supreme Court consistently has said "no". States cannot take actions that violate law, but they also cannot be forced to enforce federal law or enact/support federally-administered programs.
An easy example: states don't have to participate in school lunch programs. If they don't, the feds can deny them the money that was supposed to go to those programs. But the feds could not deny those states Medicaid funds as a way of forcing them to adopt the school lunch programs. That's been consistent.
If they don’t, the feds can deny them the money that was supposed to go to those programs. But the feds could not deny those states Medicaid funds as a way of forcing them to adopt the school lunch programs. That’s been consistent.
If the money for the School Lunch program really pays for school lunch and the subsidizes the salaries of the Teaching Staff and school board (more money than needed for school lunches) then they are going to want that program. Then stopping funding for said program, because they don’t comply with the new guidelines, is legal and far more ‘disruptive’ than just lunches.