Trump administration must release billions in SNAP funds, judge says

[Oompa Loompa]

Congress created a SNAP contingency fund. What is that fund for, if not such a contingency as this?

Well. It is a contingency funded by Congress. Not the president. So once democrats in the Senate pull their heads out of their 'you know what' and pass the continuous resolution, SNAP will not be an issue.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

As has been pointed out, the SNAP law creates a contingency fund.

Funded by Congress for actual emergencies. Not because Senate democrats want to leverage human suffering to give Healthcare subsidies to the wealthy.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Two federal judges ordered the use of contingency funds that Congress voted into law.

For emergencies. Congressional political Kabuki Theater is not classified as an emergency.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Well. It is a contingency funded by Congress. Not the president. So once democrats in the Senate pull their heads out of their 'you know what' and pass the continuous resolution, SNAP will not be an issue.

it is already funded and available for use through 2026. To use as necessary to carry out program operations.

 

[Hentenza]

What does being a Christian have to do with feeding the poor?

Some of the largest charities in the world are Christian.

 

[eleos1954]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/10/31/government-shutdown-food-assistance/

States could get partial payments for the nation’s largest anti-hunger program a few days late, after two federal judges ruled Friday that the Trump administration should use backup funds to keep food aid running despite the ongoing government shutdown.​

​

The Agriculture Department had said last week that it could not use a $5.5 billion contingency fund to pay for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — known as SNAP or food stamps. But a federal judge in Rhode Island on Friday ordered the administration to release backup funds for the program, which feeds about 42 million Americans a month and is set to lose funding Saturday. Another federal judge in Massachusetts directed the government to decide by Monday whether it would use the $5.5 billion in contingency funds for food aid.​

​

Despite the rulings, millions of Americans still won’t get food assistance benefits on Saturday because the backup funds were not ordered to be released on time. States and their contractors need a few days’ notice before sending food assistance directly to people who rely on it.​

The federal government must now scramble to either ensure that some SNAP funding is made available by Monday or appeal the rulings.

I believe it will go to appeal.

 

[7thKeeper]

But the president is not doing "the wrong" because only congress has the power of the purse to fund. The judge is practically ordering Trump to expand his executive power to fund a program that only congress can. Essentially, the court is ordering Trump to do something that is both illegal and unconstitutional.

Actually, you'd be wrong in this case. The emergency funding IS there and there is an obligation to use it, as that's the rules set up for the funds. Not using them would be against the law/legislation, which is why the court case. But I guess it's simpler to just think "Trump is in charge of all".

 

[rambot]

Some of the largest charities in the world are Christian.

It's almost like Christian are called to be charitable and supportive of the poor.

 

[Hentenza]

It's almost like Christian are called to be charitable and supportive of the poor.

Yes but for the poor not for some to do their nails and hair and such.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

When did a federal judge have more power than Congress?

You surely know how checks and balances work, right…?

 

[Tropical Wilds]

What does that have to do with anything? As I last checked, only Congress has the power of the purse. Not some federal judge. Trump does not have the authority to fund programs that can only be funded by Congress. Therefore, this judge is a quack who is ordering Trump to do something that is both unconstitutional and illegal.

Oh… So you aren’t familiar with checks and balances…

 

[Tropical Wilds]

I think it will go to appeal .... not because the Republican party wants to stop SNAP payments

(Though they do)

... but to determine if judges have the power to decide if they can over rule how congress acts or doesn't act.

(Though they do).

The democrats have voted against the CR 13 times which would allow the government to operate in a normal manner in an attempt to add a significant amount of spending attached to it. They could vote to keep the government open and "fight" for the "extras" later ... but they choose not to (they are OK with people losing their benefits) ... personally I think it is the midterms driving it ... I think after the midterms they will likely pass the CR ,,, who knows???

Democrats have tried the “let’s just do things our way and we can come back to the table later to hammer out some concessions” several times, and each times they found out there was no intent to come back later to hammer out concessions. How many times do you expect they'll accept being lied to before they finally push back?

What we are seeing here is Republicans being more than happy to punish the American people in order to push their agenda. I’m glad the Democrats are doing what they need to do to highlight that as opposed to just rolling over… Again.

 

[Servus]

When did a federal judge have more power than Congress?

Kinda sounds like the judge wants Trump to act as king and push the senate and congress aside to perform a sovereign act.

 

[rambot]

Yes but for the poor not for some to do their nails and hair and such.

BWhy not? Why couldn't someone who's life is literally worse than most could deal with, not be allowed one or two luxuries a month.
Also...what are you going to do? Take away their food?


Are you're fine with billionaires being able to tax expense their yachts I suppose. Because you're gonna be losing a LOT more cash money that way.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

You surely know how checks and balances work, right…?

Yes. Do you? Do you know the difference between a Supreme Court judge and a federal judge? Next, are you going to tell me that Judge Judy has more power than Congress?

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Oh… So you aren’t familiar with checks and balances…

You are not.

 

[Hentenza]

BWhy not? Why couldn't someone who's life is literally worse than most could deal with, not be allowed one or two luxuries a month.
Also...what are you going to do? Take away their food?

Prove that all of them are in actual need. I was watching a news report here in Houston of a charity giving out food prior to the suspension of SNAP and it surprised me how many Teslas and relatively new cars were in line. I’m all for giving to the needy but I’m not for giving to those that are gaming the system.

Are you're fine with billionaires being able to tax expense their yachts I suppose. Because you're gonna be losing a LOT more cash money that way.

Not me. I’m not a republican.

 

[rambot]

Prove that all of them are in actual need.

How many times should they be required to prove their need? 1x? 5x? To every American who ever challenges them on it?

I was watching a news report here in Houston of a charity giving out food prior to the suspension of SNAP and it surprised me how many Teslas and relatively new cars were in line.

Do you know how many americans are 1 job loss and 2 missed paycheques away from being homeless? So many peoples lives are literally that precarious....and there is exactly ZERO hope in sight for them with Republicans in charge of everything.

There certainly are families poor enough to access food banks even though they own a car. Don't shame them. its not helpful.

I’m all for giving to the needy but I’m not for giving to those that are gaming the system.
Not me. I’m not a republican.

It's going to be a common sight in America. Frankly I find it a bit jarring your first thought was "Look at these cheats" and not "oh my goodness. Look at how hard it is getting for so many people". If you only see 1 tesla it may be a scam. If you see a lot of them with other cars....hm.
...maybe that means something different

 

[Hentenza]

How many times should they be required to prove their need? 1x? 5x? To every American who ever challenges them on it?

Once. And then every year.

Do you know how many americans are 1 job loss and 2 missed paycheques away from being homeless? So many peoples lives are literally that precarious....and there is exactly ZERO hope in sight for them with Republicans in charge of everything.

How many?

There certainly are families poor enough to access food banks even though they own a car. Don't shame them. it’s not helpful.

Definitely. And most churches have food pantries to feed the needy. My church runs one that is opened 7 days a week.

It's going to be a common sight in America. Frankly I find it a bit jarring your first thought was "Look at these cheats" and not "oh my goodness. Look at how hard it is getting for so many people". If you only see 1 tesla it may be a scam. If you see a lot of them with other cars....hm.
...maybe that means something different

I find it jarring that you don’t question the obvious abuse. As I stared, I have no problems helping the needy but I have a problem helping those that are gaming the system.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

A judge cannot order that...period.

Unfortunately, this position will never be able to be defended in the Kingdom of God.
I pray one day they know His will.
Blessings