It wasn’t immediately clear how quickly the debit cards that beneficiaries use to buy groceries could be reloaded after twin rulings by federal judges. That process often takes one to two weeks. The website USAfacts says 750,000 Alabamians use SNAP dollars to afford enough to eat.
USA facts goes on to say that in 2023, 22.7% of all households with children in Alabama participated in SNAP compared with 10.2% without children. 47% of single female-parent households participated in the program compared with 3.2% of married-couple households without children under 18.
The USDA, which manages federal funding for Food Stamps, doesn’t break down benefit usage by political affiliation. But, data from the website Social Explorers says four of the five U.S. counties where SNAP usage increased utilize Food Stamps voted GOP in 2020. Again, that report doesn’t specify Alabama. However, CNN reports sixty two percent of Alabama counties voted Republican for President in 2020.
Two federal judges ruled nearly simultaneously on Friday that President Donald Trump’s administration must continue to fund SNAP, the nation’s biggest food aid program, using contingency funds during the government shutdown. The rulings came a day before the U.S. Department of Agriculture planned to freeze payments to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program because it said it could no longer keep funding it due to the shutdown.
The program serves about 1 in 8 Americans and is a major piece of the nation’s social safety net. Word in October that it would be a November 1st casualty of the shutdown sent states, food banks and SNAP recipients scrambling to figure out how to secure food. Some states said they would spend their own funds to keep versions of the program going.
U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat and the ranking member of the Senate Agriculture committee that oversees the food aid program, said Friday's rulings from judges nominated to the bench by former President Barack Obama confirm what Democrats have been saying: "The administration is choosing not to feed Americans in need, despite knowing that it is legally required to do so.”
Trump posted on social media Friday blasting congressional Democrats for the shutdown and suggesting the government would comply with the rulings but also that it needed more clarity first: “If we are given the appropriate legal direction by the Court, it will BE MY HONOR to provide the funding."
Democratic state attorneys general or governors from 25 states and the District of Columbia challenged the plan to pause the program, contending that the administration has a legal obligation to keep it running in their jurisdictions. The administration said it wasn’t allowed to use a contingency fund of about $5 billion for the program, which reversed a USDA plan from before the shutdown that said money would be tapped to keep SNAP running. The Democratic officials said not only could that money be used, but that it must be. They also said a separate fund with around $23 billion is available for the cause.
In Providence, Rhode Island, U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell ruled from the bench in a case filed by cities and nonprofits that the program must be funded using at least the contingency funds. He asked for an update on progress by Monday. Along with ordering the federal government to use emergency reserves to backfill SNAP benefits, McConnell ruled that all previous work requirement waivers must continue to be honored. The USDA during the shutdown has terminated existing waivers that exempted work requirements for older adults, veterans and others.
There were similar elements in the Boston case, where U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani ruled in a written opinion that the USDA has to pay for SNAP, calling the suspension “unlawful.” She ordered the federal government to advise the court by Monday as to whether they will use the emergency reserve funds to provide reduced SNAP benefits for November or fully fund the program “using both contingency funds and additional available funds.
“Defendants’ suspension of SNAP payments was based on the erroneous conclusion that the Contingency Funds could not be used to ensure continuation of SNAP payments,” she wrote. “This court has now clarified that Defendants are required to use those Contingency Funds as necessary for the SNAP program.”
