SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
us department of justice
Appealing SNAP Ruling, Trump Is Determined to Make Sure Poor Americans Don’t Get Food Assistance
"The administration’s legal maneuver sends a clear and devastating message: that the well-being of America’s most vulnerable is not important," said the president of the Food Research & Action Center.
Nov 07, 2025
The Trump administration will not give poor Americans food assistance without a fight.
Instead of following a federal judge’s ruling Thursday that ordered officials to release Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funds to 42 million Americans by the next day, the Department of Justice (DOJ) asked an appeals court to immediately block the ruling on Friday.
The Trump administration has argued that due to the government shutdown, the SNAP program, which provides food assistance to those making 130% of the federal poverty line or less, functionally does not exist.
In an emergency request to the 1st Circuit Court of the United States, the DOJ called the lower court's ruling, "unprecedented" and argued that it makes "a mockery of the separation of powers.”
Furthering what has been widely interpreted as an effort to pressure Democrats to cave on their demands in the government shutdown, the appeal stated that the lapse in SNAP funding was caused by “congressional failure, and... can only be solved by congressional action.”
US District Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island, in his second ruling against the administration's efforts to choke off SNAP benefits, wrote the previous day that the administration's plan to partially fund the program was insufficient. The previous week, McConnell had ruled that the administration had to tap a $5 billion contingency fund to fund the program and make up for the shortfall by drawing from other sources.
The administration agreed to use the contingency fund but offered a plan that fell several billion dollars short of fully funding the program and would have amounted to a 61% benefit cut for the average SNAP recipient, leaving millions without benefits altogether, according to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
While the administration has sought to pin the blame for funding lapses on Democrats in Congress and has asserted that its hands are tied, McConnell described the administration's maneuvering as a deliberate political stunt.
"This is a problem that could have and should have been avoided," McConnell said. “The defendants failed to consider the practical consequences associated with this decision to only partially fund SNAP... It’s likely that SNAP recipients are hungry as we sit here."
He added that Trump had essentially telegraphed his plan to defy the court order over the weekend, writing on Truth Social that “SNAP payments will be given only when the government opens.”
This, along with messages on the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) website blaming Democrats for the lapse in funding, McConnell suggested, was evidence that “SNAP benefits are being withheld for political reasons.”
“Children are immediately at risk of going hungry,” McConnell said. “This should never happen in America.”
More than 1 in 8 Americans rely on the SNAP program, 39% of whom are children. As the CBPP report explained, families with children would likely be those hardest hit under Trump's partial funding proposal.
"Nearly 1.2 million SNAP households with roughly 4.9 million people—roughly 1 in 9 SNAP recipients—will receive zero benefits because their normal benefit amount is less than the planned benefit reduction," it says. "Only one-or two-person households receive a minimum benefit under SNAP rules, leaving some households with three or more members—which are primarily households with children—at risk of receiving nothing."
The USDA has also issued a warning to grocery stores telling them it is illegal for them to offer special discounts to SNAP recipients hurt by the freeze, even though the government is allowed to grant them waivers. On Thursday, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) introduced a bill that would allow grocery stores to voluntarily offer discounts to SNAP recipients whenever their benefits are affected by a government shutdown.
“Donald Trump is the most powerful person in the world,” Wyden said. “Only a monster would use that power to deny help to millions of families that don’t know where their next meal is coming from.”
As the CPBB has noted, contrary to its claims, nothing is stopping the Trump administration from transferring funds from other food assistance programs to fund SNAP fully. It has already done this twice to sustain the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), which a court ruled was legal.
"Instead of using the funding that has been readily available to feed people, this administration continues to fight to deny tens of millions from accessing the nutrition they need," said Crystal FitzSimons, president of the Food Research & Action Center. "For some unfathomable reason, the Trump administration wants to punish the 42 million people, including children, working parents, older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans, who rely on SNAP to put food on the table."
She added that "at a time when food insecurity is rising due to increasing grocery prices, the administration’s legal maneuver sends a clear and devastating message: that the well-being of America’s most vulnerable is not important."
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘He Beat the Wrap’: Sandwich-Hurling DC Protestor Found Not Guilty of Assault
"No assault with a deli weapon after all," joked one reporter after the verdict.
Nov 06, 2025
Sean Dunn, the former US Department of Justice employee who was famously hurled a sandwich at Customs and Border Protection officers this past summer, has been found not guilty on misdemeanor assault charges.
Jurors acquitted Dunn on Thursday after deliberating for several hours after his trial ended on Wednesday afternoon. According to CNN, Dunn told reporters after the verdict that he was "relieved and looking forward to moving on with my life."
US Attorney Jeanine Pirro had originally tried to charge Dunn with felony assault, but lowered the charge to a misdemeanor offense after a grand jury in Washington, DC refused to indict him.
Dunn was caught on camera angrily throwing a sandwich at federal immigration enforcement officers back in August, and he could be heard calling the officers “fascists,” and telling them they were not welcome in his city.
Shortly afterward, Pirro vowed to throw the proverbial book at Dunn for his food-tossing transgression.
“He thought it was funny,” Pirro said in a video she posted on social media. “Well, he doesn’t think it’s funny today because we charged him with a felony. And we’re gonna back the police to the hilt! So, there. Stick your Subway sandwich somewhere else.”
Dunn's case became a cause célèbre for many Washington, DC residents who have opposed President Donald Trump's decision to deploy the National Guard and to conduct aggressive immigration raids in their city.
Many journalists reacted to news of Dunn's acquittal by deploying a number of sandwich-related puns.
"Apparently you can indict a ham sandwich but you can’t convict turkey sub," joked tech journalist Kara Swisher in a post on Bluesky.
"You could say he... beat the wrap," wrote Los Angeles-based independent journalist Mel Buer.
"If the hoagie didn't hit, you must acquit!" wrote The Bulwark's Sam Stein on X.
"No assault with a deli weapon after all," remarked Wall Street Journal reporter Josh Dawsey.
"Congratulations, US Attorney Pirro, for making Sean Dunn the hero that DC deserves," wrote journalist Marcy Wheeler.
"Another jury finds another Trump DOJ case sub-par," wrote Adam Klasfeld, editor-in-chief of All Rise News.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Blunt Corruption': Trump DOJ Hands Google an Antitrust Win After Tech Giant's Ballroom Donation
Alphabet, Google's parent company, is contributing $22 million to the president's ballroom project.
Nov 06, 2025
The US Justice Department has reportedly given the tech behemoth Alphabet a green light to acquire the cybersecurity firm Wiz after it was revealed that the Google parent company donated to President Donald Trump's $300 million ballroom project.
The merger deal is valued at over $30 billion and would mark Alphabet's largest acquisition to date, even as the company faces antitrust cases at the state and federal level. Wiz CEO Assaf Rappaport announced the Justice Department's decision on Wednesday at an event hosted by the Wall Street Journal.
The DOJ approval came after Bloomberg reported in June that the Justice Department's antitrust arm was reviewing whether Alphabet's acquisition of Wiz would illegally undermine competition. The following month, the Justice Department ousted two of its top antitrust officials amid internal conflict over shady corporate settlement deals.
Lee Hepner, an antitrust attorney and senior legal counsel for the American Economic Liberties Project, called the DOJ's clearing of Alphabet's Wiz acquisition "the kind of blunt corruption that most won't notice."
Hepner observed that news of the approval came shortly after the White House released a list of individuals and corporations that have pumped money into Trump's gaudy ballroom project. Google—which also donated to Trump's inauguration—was one of the prominent names on the list, alongside Amazon, Apple, and other major corporations.
Google is reportedly funneling $22 million to the ballroom project.
"These giant corporations aren't funding the Trump ballroom debacle out of a sense of civic pride," Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said earlier this week. "They have massive interests before the federal government and they undoubtedly hope to curry favor with, and receive favorable treatment from, the Trump administration."
"Millions to fund Trump's architectural whims are nothing compared to the billions at stake in procurement, regulatory, and enforcement decisions," he added.
According to a Public Citizen report published Monday, two-thirds of the 24 known corporate donors to Trump's ballroom project—including Google—are beneficiaries of recent government contracts.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular