Suspending food benefits during the shutdown, held unlawful and then overtaken

Roughly 42 million people were affected. USDA disbursed partial benefits from a contingency reserve of about $4.65 billion, covering roughly 65 percent of the month. The full-payment order never took effect. Congress ended the shutdown with SNAP funded through September 2026, the Solicitor General withdrew the stay application as moot, and no appellate court ruled on the merits of the district courts' holdings.

SNAP had never been terminated in the program's history. During the shutdown that began in October 2025, USDA announced that November benefits would not be paid. Two suits followed, one brought by states before Judge Indira Talwani in Massachusetts and one by cities, churches, and nonprofits before Chief Judge John McConnell in Rhode Island. On October 31 both judges held that USDA was statutorily obliged to deploy the SNAP contingency reserve, McConnell noting from the bench that the government had itself used those funds during the 2019 shutdown. The administration complied in part, releasing about $4.65 billion for partial benefits.

On November 6, McConnell went further, finding the administration had acted arbitrarily and capriciously in declining to fund the full month and ordering full payment from a second source. He said statements by administration officials indicated benefits were being withheld for political purposes. The Justice Department told the First Circuit that the order made a mockery of the separation of powers and directed USDA to find money in the metaphorical couch cushions; the Solicitor General told the Supreme Court that the order was indefensible on the merits and that paying the additional roughly $4 billion would require raiding child nutrition programs. The First Circuit declined to intervene immediately.

On November 7, Justice Jackson entered an administrative stay so the appeals court could consider the application in full. Twenty states had already begun loading full benefits; USDA then instructed states to undo those issuances, and Judge Talwani blocked that instruction. On November 11 the Court extended the stay, over Jackson's noted objection. Two days later, with the shutdown over and the reopening bill funding SNAP through September 2026, the Solicitor General withdrew the application as moot. The district courts' holdings were therefore neither affirmed nor reversed; the controversy was overtaken rather than decided. This record is rated Tier B for that reason.

Documented; two district-court orders, a First Circuit denial, and Supreme Court administrative stays

D. Mass. (Talwani) and D.R.I. (McConnell) held USDA obliged to use the contingency reserve; McConnell then ordered full payment; Justice Jackson entered an administrative stay Nov. 7, 2025 and the Court extended it Nov. 11. The shutdown ended and the government withdrew its application on Nov. 13, so the district holdings were neither upheld nor reversed

USDA announced non-payment 2025-10; district orders 2025-10-31 and 2025-11-06; full-payment order 2025-11-06; stay 2025-11-07; application withdrawn 2025-11-13