The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on November 7, 2025, to temporarily allow the Trump administration to withhold $4 billion in funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) has sent shockwaves through communities and households across the country. The emergency order, issued by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, comes at a time when the federal government shutdown—the longest in American history—has already left millions of Americans, including government workers and vulnerable families, in a state of uncertainty and distress.
SNAP, commonly known as food stamps, serves as a lifeline for nearly 42 million low-income Americans, representing about one in eight people nationwide. The program typically costs between $8.5 and $9 billion each month, providing crucial support via pre-loaded debit cards that recipients use to purchase groceries. But the ongoing shutdown had already cast a shadow over the program’s immediate future, with the administration warning it could only fund a portion of the benefits for November.
The legal wrangling began in earnest when U.S. District Judge John McConnell, based in Rhode Island, ordered the Trump administration on November 6 to fully fund SNAP for November. McConnell’s ruling was explicit and urgent, giving the government just 24 hours to comply. “People have gone without for too long,” McConnell said, according to Fox News. “Not making payments to them for even another day is simply unacceptable. This should never happen in America.” He went further, accusing the administration of withholding food aid “for political reasons” and warning that without immediate action, “16 million children are immediately at risk of going hungry.”
The Trump administration, however, pushed back, arguing that the ongoing government shutdown had drained available resources. Officials stated they could only pay about 65% of the $9 billion needed for November, using contingency funds. They objected to the judge’s order to draw an additional $4 billion from other federal nutrition programs, such as Section 32 funds earmarked for child nutrition and school lunches. “Once those billions are out the door, there is no ready mechanism for the government to recover those funds—to the significant detriment of those other critical social programs whose budgets the district court ordered the government to raid,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in the administration’s Supreme Court filing, as reported by NBC News.
After the federal appeals court in Boston denied the administration’s request for a temporary block on McConnell’s order, the Trump team filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson responded late Friday with an administrative stay, freezing the lower court’s ruling for two days while the appeals process plays out. The intent, Jackson wrote, was to give the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals time to consider the government’s application “with dispatch.”
The decision has sparked outrage and deep concern among advocates, state officials, and legal experts. New York Attorney General Letitia James called the Supreme Court’s intervention “a tragedy for the millions of Americans who rely on SNAP to feed their families.” She added, “It is disgraceful that the Trump administration chose to fight this in court instead of fulfilling its responsibility to the American people.” Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey echoed this sentiment, stating, “President Trump should never have put the American people in this position.”
Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which oversees SNAP, found itself caught between conflicting court orders and administrative directives. In a memo sent to state SNAP directors on November 7, Patrick Penn, deputy undersecretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services, wrote, “FNS is working towards implementing November 2025 full benefit issuances in compliance with the November 6, 2025, order from the District Court of Rhode Island.” He pledged to keep regional directors “as up to date as possible on any future developments” and acknowledged the confusion and anxiety gripping states and recipients alike.
States have responded in a patchwork fashion. Some, like New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, tapped into their own reserves to keep SNAP payments flowing, directing agencies to issue full benefits for November. Others, lacking the fiscal capacity to replace lost federal dollars, have been forced to make hard choices or suspend payments altogether. Food banks and emergency distribution sites, such as the Mt. Carmel Veterans Service Center in Colorado Springs, have seen a surge in demand, with more than 100 cars lining up for food boxes, according to Reuters. Volunteers in Philadelphia and beyond have scrambled to fill the gaps, even as their resources are stretched thin.
The consequences of the funding lapse have been immediate and severe. For the first time in SNAP’s 61-year history, benefits have lapsed due to a government shutdown. Families have reported skipping meals, relying on meager pantry staples like cereal or ramen, and even forgoing medications to stretch tight budgets, as NBC News and Reuters both documented. Food pantries, already under strain, have struggled to meet the increased need as recipients turn to them in desperation.
The legal battle over SNAP funding has also become a flashpoint in the broader debate over the shutdown and the responsibilities of government during times of crisis. The Trump administration has argued that the court’s intervention amounts to “judicial activism,” with Department of Justice lawyers warning that it could “sow further shutdown chaos” and create a “run on the bank by way of judicial fiat.” Attorney General Pam Bondi took to social media to defend the administration’s position, stating, “Our attorneys will not stop fighting, day and night, to defend and advance President Trump’s agenda.”
On the other side, legal advocacy groups like Democracy Forward have hailed Judge McConnell’s ruling as a necessary check on executive overreach. Skye Perryman, head of the group, told MSNBC that “the courts hearing cases over the withholding of SNAP benefits have been very clear, that this administration not only had the legal authority to make these payments but that the administration must make these payments.”
As the legal process continues, the fate of November’s full SNAP benefits hangs in the balance. Justice Jackson’s administrative stay is set to expire two days after the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rules on the administration’s formal request to halt Judge McConnell’s order. In the meantime, the uncertainty leaves millions of Americans—children, seniors, veterans, and working families—wondering how they will put food on the table.
The Supreme Court’s intervention has brought the human stakes of the shutdown into sharp relief. While lawmakers and judges debate the finer points of funding and authority, the real cost is borne by those who depend on SNAP for daily sustenance. As the nation waits for a final decision, the question remains: How long can the most vulnerable Americans be asked to endure such uncertainty?
With the government shutdown showing no sign of immediate resolution, and the courts wrestling with the balance of power and responsibility, the story of SNAP in November 2025 stands as a stark reminder of how policy, politics, and people’s lives are inextricably linked.
