BREAKING: Federal judge rules that the Trump administration likely illegally suspended SNAP benefits

[In It to Win It]

BREAKING: Federal judge rules that the Trump administration likely illegally suspended SNAP benefits, ruling that at least reduced distribution is required to go forward under law using the billion reserve fund.

Judge gives the Trump admin until Monday to respond as to whether it will act.

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) 2025-10-31T17:59:03.682Z

Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama appointee, keeps the TRO request under advisement while the Trump administration decides — by Monday — if it is going to use the contingent funding to proceed with (at least reduced) November SNAP benefits.

Opinion: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) 2025-10-31T18:03:36.067Z

BREAKING: In a second case over the suspension of SNAP benefits, a federal judge in Rhode Island has issued a TRO from the bench against the Trump administration.

There is no written order yet, but here is CNBC's report: www.cnbc.com/2025/10/31/s...

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) 2025-10-31T18:22:38.699Z

🚨BREAKING: 2 fed courts have issued orders blocking Trump’s attempt to defund SNAP. Congrats to @democracyforward.org, its co counsel and clients, and Dem State AGs.

— Marc Elias (@marcelias.bsky.social) 2025-10-31T18:04:27.088Z

[hlthe2b]

1. I EXPECTED this. Now what will be fascinating is if Trump orders DOJ to appeal this under emergency appeal BECAUSE

he doesn't want to lose the case--have a court override HIS decisions and tell HIM what to do. If he does that how horrific he and all R's would look.

Obviously, I just want SNAP benefits to be restored and no one to suffer. But admittedly, I would love to see the explosive blowback if Trump were stupid enough to do what I just outlined. You know it is going to just all but "kill him" to do nothing. Sadly, that is not literal, Orrex.

[Amishman]

6. What will be interesting is how this is handled in light of Trump v. CASA from earlier this year

SCOTUS greatly limited the ability of district judges ability to apply protections beyond the parties named in a suit.

[Lovie777]

2. To the 6 RW justices at the US SC......................

[pat_k]

3. Now what will they say? "This radical judge says we CAN fund snap, but we REFUSE Anyway"???

Seems to me this pretty much puts the kibosh on "It's out of our hands -- not legal -- no can do" (even though the regime does about 10,000 illegal things daily across the executive agencies).

Are they really going to appeal this and thereby PROVE how hellbent they are on starving people?

That would go over great.

[RedWhiteBlueIsRacist]

4. Judge/s: "It's illegal". Trump admin: "Duh!"

[Grim Chieftain]

5. Take that you evil felon

[littlemissmartypants]

7. "It's a criminal enterprise." Malcolm Nance

[Magoo48]

8. So?

[Escurumbele]

9. There we go again...LIKELY...Is it, "IT DID", opr "NOT"? Are they leaving room for saying "NO, THEY DID NOT"?

Gee whiz, so much cowardice on our era.

[pat_k]

11. I think that it may be as far as she can go before a full hearing on the matter.

I'm no a lawyer, but I think the motion for an injunction pending trial, where plaintiffs get the order if the judge finds a likelihood of success on the merits, that they will suffer irreparable harm without the injunction, that the balance of hardships favors them, and that the injunction is not adverse to the public interest.

I think that there are mandatory injunctions (order to do something) and prohibitory injunctions (order not to do something). Her's appears to be the former.

If USDA throws up their hands and pays, I guess it doesn't need to go further.

There has also been another ruling on the matter in a case brought by cities and community groups that appears to be more definitive.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/federal-judge-orders-trump-administration-pay-snap-benefits-contingenc-rcna241187

[pat_k]

10. A second lawsuit by cities and community organizations: U.S District Judge John McConnell ordered USDA to pay recipients

A Rhode Island federal judge on Friday ordered the U.S. Department of Agriculture to distribute money owed to recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program "as soon as possible," just one day before funding for SNAP was set to lapse.

U.S District Judge John McConnell's ruling from the bench came shortly after another federal judge in a separate case said that the Trump administration's plan not to pay out SNAP benefits beginning on Nov. 1 due to the ongoing federal government shutdown was "unlawful" but stopped short of ordering the Trump administration to disburse funds.

Ruling in favor of a group of cities and community organizations that sued over the cuts, McConnell said that the USDA must fund SNAP using money in a contingency fund. But, he added that if the department finds that the money in the contingency fund is insufficient, then the agency must use other funding sources to make those payments.

“There is no doubt that the six billion dollars in contingency funds are appropriated funds that are without a doubt necessary to carry out the program’s operation,” McConnell said in his oral ruling. “The shutdown of the government through funding doesn’t do away with SNAP. It just does away with the funding of it. There could be no greater necessity than the prohibition across the board of funds for the program’s operations.”

McConnell added, “there is no doubt, and it is beyond argument, that irreparable harm will begin to occur if it hasn’t already occurred in the terror it has caused some people about the availability of funding for food for their family."

McConnell addressed the Trump administration's argument that contingency funds might be needed for other reasons in the near future, like in the aftermath of a hypothetical hurricane.

"It’s clear that when compared to the millions of people that will go without funds for food versus the agency’s desire not to use contingency funds in case there’s a hurricane need, the balances of those equities clearly goes on the side of ensuring that people are fed,” the judge said.