Posted on 10/31/2025 12:55:51 PM PDT by Red Badger
“Here, Congress appropriated $6 billion to SNAP in 2024as a contingency reserve through 2026, ‘to be used in such amounts and at such times as may become necessary to carry out program operations.’”
==========================================================
Federal judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island ordered the Trump administration to use contingency funds to cover SNAP benefits starting tomorrow.
The administration said it could not use the $5 billion contingency fund.
The Democrat officials who challenged the administration claimed the Agriculture Department (USDA) has a “separate fund with around $23 billion” that it could use for SNAP.
However, US District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston did not grant a temporary restraining order. It “remains under advisement.”
Talwani gave the Trump administration until Monday to tell her if it “will authorize at least reduced SNAP benefits for November and, if so, their timeline for determining whether to authorize only reduced SNAP benefits using the Contingency Funds or to authorize full SNAP benefits using both the Contingency Funds and additional available funds.”
But, from Talwani’s opinion, it sounds like she will grant the TRO if the administration says it won’t take action.
“With this statutory and regulatory context, Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that Congress intended the funding of SNAP benefits, at a reduced rate if necessary, when appropriated funds prove insufficient,” wrote Talwani. “Here, Congress appropriated $6 billion to SNAP in 2024as a contingency reserve through 2026, ‘to be used in such amounts and at such times as may become necessary to carry out program operations.’”
Talwani said that the Agriculture Department (USDA) can use the funds towards SNAP benefits as the shutdown continues:
Plaintiffs are therefore likely to succeed on the merits of their claimunder 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A), (C), that Defendants’ suspension of SNAP benefits is contrary to law. Moreover, as Plaintiffs note, in addition to the contingency funds, there are additional funds that Defendants would have discretion to access. Under Section 32 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1935, “Congress has set forth a mandatory, and permanent, appropriation that stems from 30% of customs receipts on all imports from the prior calendar year.” Defendant’s Opp’n 5 [Doc. No. 18]. Much of this funding is appropriated for the Child Nutrition Program, but USDA has the authority pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 2257 to authorize transfers of such funds discretionarily. Id. Indeed, USDA has done so recently to transfer funds to the WIC program.Accordingly, Defendants may also consider relying on these discretionary funds to fund the remaining SNAP shortfall.
I cannot find the order from US District Judge John McConnell in Rhode Island because not enough people have attached it, even though they quote from it!
Ugh.
Anyway.
According to CNN, McConnell said: “There is no doubt that the … contingency funds are appropriated funds that are without a doubt necessary to carry out the program’s operation. The shutdown of the government through funding doesn’t do away with SNAP, it just does away with the funding of it.”
McConnell blasted the administration over claims the USDA can only use the funds “for hurricanes or other uncontrollable catastrophes.”
“SNAP benefits have never, until now, been terminated,” McConnell said, as reported by The Hill. “And the United States has in fact admitted that the contingency funds are appropriately used during a shutdown and that occurred in 2019.”
McConnell also told the USDA to provide him with an update by Monday.
Because judges at that level supersede congress and the President.
Trump needs to start telling judges how to run their courts.
The other reason they want this is so they can claim Trump broke federal law in using those funds because Congress didn’t give him approval. They will hoist him up one petard or another.
So, if used, would that be breaking the law?
Unfortunately it’s a smart political move on his part. Now Trump would be forced to appeal it instead of keeping the blame on the Democrats.
Yes. Federal Law.
The Administration can appeal the decision...............
The Trump administration should only give the SNAP funds to Republican states.
Well hell, let’s just get out of the way and let the judges run the country..
They’re trying to force POTUS to break federal law, and if he does, they’ll impeach him after the midterms if they get Congress back. They’re trying to put him in a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation. Even if a Judge orders him to do it, that would not stop the impeachment train afterwards.
Put them before a military tribunal, not their buddies on the Federal bench.
...”to be used in such amounts and at such times as may become necessary to carry out program operations.”
No such wording exists in the enabling legislation which created SNAP, nor do they exist within USDA financial guidelines (which btw are not subject to a federal judge’s order or decision in favor of 25 states (ie not the ENTIRE US States and therefore not equal justice, and therefore unConstitutional to order such) to order the USDA (an Executive Branch division under the Chief Executive).
For the USDA to do so, whether under Presidential order or not— would be a violation of Federal Law. So this judge is contemplating ordering the USDA to violate the law— thus they do not have to do so, and will not. Additionally the goal seems to be to try to force the President to violate Federal Law, and thus become an impeachable offense-— made under judicial fiat, illegally.
Pretty stupid judges but then.... they are the apparatchiks under direction. Gotcha, bastard judges!
They will Impeach him anyway. Impeachmenteans nothing anymore.
1. Congress funded the program
2. Congress closed the Government and (in effect) told the Executive Branch that they can’t spend unnecessary funds.
Conclusions:
1. The Executive Branch’s hands are tied.
2. The plaintiffs sued the wrong Branch of Government.
President Trump should not appeal this and disperse the money as directed by the court. To appeal it would make him the villain.
When all is settled, appeal it then for future reference.
BOTH Obama appointments.....
“Will set aside money and shall spend.”
I guess it depends on what the word “shall” means. Must or schmaybe?
The left has entered it’s doomscroll phase.
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.