Tayami Vega, Maria Ruiz, and Charles Pierre receive groceries from the Curley's House Food Bank days before the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits may expire due to the Federal government shutdown on October 30, 2025 in Miami, Florida.
Republicans to Illegally Starve the Poor to Force Dems to Cut Health Insurance
Not only is this cruel. It's also illegal.
The Trump administration has announced that it will not allow approximately $6 billion contingency funding still left in SNAP (commonly known as food stamps) to be used to feed the one in eight Americans who rely on it. It claims that the only way these people will receive food after November 1 is if Democrats give up their fight to protect the Affordable Care Act and fund the Republicans' "Big Ugly Bill" with no changes.
Not only is this cruel. It's also illegal.
There are approximately $6 billion sitting in a contingency account to fund SNAP in an emergency. According to the law, appropriating these funds, "For necessary expenses ...[these funds] shall be placed in reserve to use only in such amounts and at such times a may become necessary to carry out program operations." It couldn't be clearer in the law that release of these funds is now "necessary to carry out program operations." Spending this contingency on SNAP in November is not only clearly legal, it's arguably mandatory.
Until a few days ago, even the Trump administration agreed that these funds should be used to continue SNAP funding during the shutdown. In a 55-page "Lapse of Funding" plan posted by Trump's Department of Agriculture on September 30, 2025, during a lapse, "[T]he Department will continue operations related to... core nutrition safety net programs."
A few days ago, this plan disappeared entirely from the department's website. In its place, the Agriculture Department issued a new 2-page memo asserting the "Due to Congressional Democrats' refusal to pass a clean continuing resolution (CR), approximately 42 million individuals will not receive SNAP benefits come November 1st." The new memo cited absolutely no law supporting its position. Instead, it made up a rule claiming that the "contingency fund is not available to support FY 2026 regular benefits, because the appropriation for regular benefits no longer exist." So what! The contingency funds exist. They were funded by Congress and are sitting there waiting to pay for SNAP benefits now.
As constitutional law professor David Super wrote, "Terminating SNAP is a choice, and an overtly unlawful one at that. The Administration has chosen to hold food for more than forty million vulnerable people hostage to try to force Democrats to capitulate without negotiations."
Democrats need to call out this cruel and illegal Republican attempt to starve the poor to force cuts to health insurance under which 30 million Americans are likely to become uninsured and millions more will see their premiums double or triple.
Meanwhile, 25 State Attorney Generals sued the Trump regime in Federal Court this week, demanding the administration be forced to expend the contingency SNAP funds. A federal judge in the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts just heard oral arguments in the suit and, according to the New York Times, seemed skeptical of the administration's arguments.
During oral arguments, the judge stated that "Congress has put money in an emergency fund. It's hard for me to understand how this isn't an emergency, when there's not money, and a lot of people are needing SNAP benefits." She promised to rule quickly. But if she orders the regime to pay the SNAP benefits for November, the regime will probably make an emergency appeal to the US Supreme Court and if SCOTUS follows its recent pattern, it could put such an order on hold until SCOTUS hears the case months down the line, making sure its too late to pay the SNAP benefits in time.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just four days to go in our Spring Campaign, we are not even halfway to our goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The Trump administration has announced that it will not allow approximately $6 billion contingency funding still left in SNAP (commonly known as food stamps) to be used to feed the one in eight Americans who rely on it. It claims that the only way these people will receive food after November 1 is if Democrats give up their fight to protect the Affordable Care Act and fund the Republicans' "Big Ugly Bill" with no changes.
Not only is this cruel. It's also illegal.
There are approximately $6 billion sitting in a contingency account to fund SNAP in an emergency. According to the law, appropriating these funds, "For necessary expenses ...[these funds] shall be placed in reserve to use only in such amounts and at such times a may become necessary to carry out program operations." It couldn't be clearer in the law that release of these funds is now "necessary to carry out program operations." Spending this contingency on SNAP in November is not only clearly legal, it's arguably mandatory.
Until a few days ago, even the Trump administration agreed that these funds should be used to continue SNAP funding during the shutdown. In a 55-page "Lapse of Funding" plan posted by Trump's Department of Agriculture on September 30, 2025, during a lapse, "[T]he Department will continue operations related to... core nutrition safety net programs."
A few days ago, this plan disappeared entirely from the department's website. In its place, the Agriculture Department issued a new 2-page memo asserting the "Due to Congressional Democrats' refusal to pass a clean continuing resolution (CR), approximately 42 million individuals will not receive SNAP benefits come November 1st." The new memo cited absolutely no law supporting its position. Instead, it made up a rule claiming that the "contingency fund is not available to support FY 2026 regular benefits, because the appropriation for regular benefits no longer exist." So what! The contingency funds exist. They were funded by Congress and are sitting there waiting to pay for SNAP benefits now.
As constitutional law professor David Super wrote, "Terminating SNAP is a choice, and an overtly unlawful one at that. The Administration has chosen to hold food for more than forty million vulnerable people hostage to try to force Democrats to capitulate without negotiations."
Democrats need to call out this cruel and illegal Republican attempt to starve the poor to force cuts to health insurance under which 30 million Americans are likely to become uninsured and millions more will see their premiums double or triple.
Meanwhile, 25 State Attorney Generals sued the Trump regime in Federal Court this week, demanding the administration be forced to expend the contingency SNAP funds. A federal judge in the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts just heard oral arguments in the suit and, according to the New York Times, seemed skeptical of the administration's arguments.
During oral arguments, the judge stated that "Congress has put money in an emergency fund. It's hard for me to understand how this isn't an emergency, when there's not money, and a lot of people are needing SNAP benefits." She promised to rule quickly. But if she orders the regime to pay the SNAP benefits for November, the regime will probably make an emergency appeal to the US Supreme Court and if SCOTUS follows its recent pattern, it could put such an order on hold until SCOTUS hears the case months down the line, making sure its too late to pay the SNAP benefits in time.
The Trump administration has announced that it will not allow approximately $6 billion contingency funding still left in SNAP (commonly known as food stamps) to be used to feed the one in eight Americans who rely on it. It claims that the only way these people will receive food after November 1 is if Democrats give up their fight to protect the Affordable Care Act and fund the Republicans' "Big Ugly Bill" with no changes.
Not only is this cruel. It's also illegal.
There are approximately $6 billion sitting in a contingency account to fund SNAP in an emergency. According to the law, appropriating these funds, "For necessary expenses ...[these funds] shall be placed in reserve to use only in such amounts and at such times a may become necessary to carry out program operations." It couldn't be clearer in the law that release of these funds is now "necessary to carry out program operations." Spending this contingency on SNAP in November is not only clearly legal, it's arguably mandatory.
Until a few days ago, even the Trump administration agreed that these funds should be used to continue SNAP funding during the shutdown. In a 55-page "Lapse of Funding" plan posted by Trump's Department of Agriculture on September 30, 2025, during a lapse, "[T]he Department will continue operations related to... core nutrition safety net programs."
A few days ago, this plan disappeared entirely from the department's website. In its place, the Agriculture Department issued a new 2-page memo asserting the "Due to Congressional Democrats' refusal to pass a clean continuing resolution (CR), approximately 42 million individuals will not receive SNAP benefits come November 1st." The new memo cited absolutely no law supporting its position. Instead, it made up a rule claiming that the "contingency fund is not available to support FY 2026 regular benefits, because the appropriation for regular benefits no longer exist." So what! The contingency funds exist. They were funded by Congress and are sitting there waiting to pay for SNAP benefits now.
As constitutional law professor David Super wrote, "Terminating SNAP is a choice, and an overtly unlawful one at that. The Administration has chosen to hold food for more than forty million vulnerable people hostage to try to force Democrats to capitulate without negotiations."
Democrats need to call out this cruel and illegal Republican attempt to starve the poor to force cuts to health insurance under which 30 million Americans are likely to become uninsured and millions more will see their premiums double or triple.
Meanwhile, 25 State Attorney Generals sued the Trump regime in Federal Court this week, demanding the administration be forced to expend the contingency SNAP funds. A federal judge in the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts just heard oral arguments in the suit and, according to the New York Times, seemed skeptical of the administration's arguments.
During oral arguments, the judge stated that "Congress has put money in an emergency fund. It's hard for me to understand how this isn't an emergency, when there's not money, and a lot of people are needing SNAP benefits." She promised to rule quickly. But if she orders the regime to pay the SNAP benefits for November, the regime will probably make an emergency appeal to the US Supreme Court and if SCOTUS follows its recent pattern, it could put such an order on hold until SCOTUS hears the case months down the line, making sure its too late to pay the SNAP benefits in time.