Posted on 06/24/2026 8:11:37 AM PDT by V_TWIN
People are allowed to poison themselves with junk food AND you have to pay for it!
At least that's the latest from our federal courts.
A federal judge on Monday blocked the Trump administration from allowing five states to ban the purchase of sugary drinks and candy with food stamps.
The decision is a major setback for Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s "Make America Healthy Again" movement, known as MAHA, which is focused on minimizing the consumption of ultraprocessed foods to reduce the prevalence of chronic diseases such as obesity and diabetes.
Sorry, taxpayers must continue to fund the Kool-Aid pineapples.
Judge Amy (the person apparently in charge of the country) demands it!
US District Judge Amy Berman Jackson in the District of Columbia ruled that the US Department of Agriculture lacked the authority to approve state waivers in pilot projects in Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee and West Virginia.
In their waivers, the states sought to change the federal definition of food to one that restricted certain products. The bans differed somewhat in each state, with all limiting the purchase of sugary drinks, such as soda and energy beverages, and some also restricting candy. The limits applied to all SNAP recipients, with no exceptions allowed.
(Excerpt) Read more at notthebee.com ...
“Personally I don’t care where food stamp recipients get their calories from - healthy or not is their choice”
I don’t care either when they are paying for it, but when we are paying for it, I do care. The money should go for what it was intended, to provide sustenance, i.e., food and drink regarded as a source of strength; nourishment. But of course as is so typical of most government programs it just becomes another give away that you and I pay for. This judge is way off.
“There are people out there that need help”
There is no clause in the Constitution that says you can take something from someone who owns it and give it to someone else “because they need help”.
Charity should not be an arm of the government.
Every kid in every school in the nation are getting free meals on my dime and they get them in the summer, too.
“It’s spending... authorized by Congress. 100% constitutional.”
I would argue about it being Constitutional, but why? It’s spending and it’s being spent, Constitutional or not.
Again, whole passel of judges could us a good hot tar and feathering.
Either that or keel haul their sorry anti American asses.
If they only bought beef and potatoes what would happen to prices of beef and potatos?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.