On Friday, a federal judge ruled in favor of 20 Democrat-led states, issuing an injunction preventing new regulations on SNAP benefits from taking effect.
According to AP, U.S. District Judge Myong Joun said he would issue a memorandum explaining why he issued the preliminary injunction. Some of the restrictions the Democratic states sued over involved “gender ideology,” “immigration,” and “fair athletic opportunities” for women and girls, i.e., things that have nothing to do with keeping low-income families fed.
In their lawsuit, the states argued the Agriculture Department has “thrown unconstitutional and unlawful roadblocks between the programs created by Congress and the States that rely on them, threatening critical nutrition support, vital agricultural research, and the safety of our national food chain and communities.”
Lawyers on behalf of the Agriculture Department argued that “these new requirements would help promote the sound stewardship of taxpayer dollars, strengthen USDA’s control and oversight of obligated funds, and ensure that grant recipients comply with federal laws, regulations, and policies.”
Considering that the national debt has surpassed the U.S. GDP under the Trump administration, “sound stewardship of taxpayer dollars” hasn’t really been one of their strong suits.
CNBC reports that 3.5 million people have already lost SNAP benefits as a result of new regulations stemming from President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.”
From CNBC:
Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act included $187 billion in cuts to SNAP, according to the Congressional Budget Office. At the time, CBPP called it the “biggest cut in the program’s history.”
The new law requires states to help pay for SNAP benefits, which were previously a federal obligation.
To limit how much they must contribute, states can bring down their error rates — that is, underpayments or overpayments of SNAP benefits. However, curbing those error rates may result in individuals losing access to SNAP, according to CBPP.
In Arizona, there has been a 51% decrease in SNAP beneficiaries, with Louisiana seeing a 20% decrease. This would be a good thing if it meant people were getting off the program because they found work that paid them a livable wage, but that’s not what’s happening. The loss of SNAP benefits comes as food insecurity increases due to the continually rising price of goods.
Much of Trump’s second term has been spent gutting social safety-net programs, a stark reversal of his campaign promises to lower prices. One of the longest government shutdowns in United States history occurred last fall as a result of lapsed tax subsidies for insurance provided through the Affordable Care Act. In fact, the Trump administration used that shutdown as an excuse not to pay out SNAP benefits.
The shutdown ended with no deal being reached to extend the subsidies, thanks in no small part to Trump advocating against them. The lapsed subsidies have resulted in monthly premiums increasing by 26% on average. A report from the health care research group KFF found that an estimated 9 million people are newly uninsured due to being unable to afford the increase in monthly premiums.
So under Trump, more Americans are getting sicker and going hungry. But hey, at least the money that could’ve prevented low-income families from starving is being used to *checks notes* build a new White House Ballroom.
We love it here.
SEE ALSO:
Black Churches Can Help Communities Navigate New SNAP Requirements
Policing The Plate: The Politics Of Texas’ New SNAP Restrictions
