On the night of November 1, 2025, as millions of Americans faced the abrupt loss of their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, President Donald Trump played host to a lavish "Great Gatsby"-themed Halloween party at his Mar-a-Lago estate. The event, characterized by its 1920s flair—guests in flapper dresses and tuxedos, jazz music, and opulent decorations—was intended as a nod to the F. Scott Fitzgerald novel, which famously explores themes of wealth and class division in America. Among the high-profile attendees were Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Ivanka Trump, Tiffany Trump, and her husband Michael Boulos, according to ABC News.
The party's timing, coming just hours before the government lapsed in funding for SNAP—a critical anti-poverty program relied upon by approximately 42 million Americans—sparked immediate and fierce criticism from Democratic leaders. Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic National Committee, lambasted the president, stating, "Last night, Trump made it even clearer that he doesn’t give a damn about anyone but himself and his wealthy friends." Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy echoed these sentiments, sharing a photo from the event and remarking, "The way he rubs his inhumanity in Americans' face never ceases to stun me."
Behind the scenes, the situation was growing increasingly dire for SNAP recipients. The government shutdown, which began on October 1, 2025, after Congress failed to reach a funding agreement, marked the first time in U.S. history that SNAP payments had been disrupted by a lapse in federal appropriations. The majority of SNAP recipients are children or adults over 60, and the sudden halt in benefits left many scrambling to find alternative sources of food, with food banks and pantries reporting surges in demand. As Carolyn Vega of anti-poverty nonprofit Share Our Strength told Axios, "These are families who count on SNAP benefits to feed their families, and the vast majority of them are working families. They don't necessarily have time to go stand in a long line in a food pantry or a food bank."
Legal battles quickly ensued. On November 1, a federal judge in Rhode Island temporarily ordered the Trump administration to continue SNAP funding, following a lawsuit brought by several states. Another judge in Boston ruled that the administration's attempt to suspend SNAP was "unlawful," but stopped short of immediately ordering the program to be funded. President Trump, for his part, said his administration's lawyers were unsure whether they had the legal authority to pay for SNAP during the shutdown, and he requested clarity from the courts. "If we are given the appropriate legal direction by the Court, it will BE MY HONOR to provide the funding, just like I did with Military and Law Enforcement Pay," Trump posted on social media.
Yet, the legal clarity Trump sought seemed elusive. On November 4, Trump posted on Truth Social, "SNAP BENEFITS, which increased by Billions and Billions of Dollars (MANY FOLD!) during Crooked Joe Biden's disastrous term in office ... will be given only when the Radical Left Democrats open up government." This statement appeared to defy the federal court orders requiring the administration to pay at least partial SNAP benefits, and it immediately sowed confusion among recipients and policymakers alike, as reported by multiple outlets including Axios and the Detroit Free Press.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt moved quickly to clarify the administration’s position. Speaking to reporters on November 4, she insisted, "The administration is fully complying with the court order. I just spoke to the president about it. (But) The recipients of these SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits need to understand, it’s going to take some time." Leavitt explained that the president’s remarks were intended to refer to future use of the contingency fund, not a refusal to comply with the judge’s order. She further blamed Democrats for the ongoing shutdown and said, "We are digging into a contingency fund that is supposed to be for emergencies, for catastrophes, for war. And the president does not want to have to tap into this fund in the future. That’s what he was referring to in his Truth Social post."
Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which oversees SNAP, announced it would provide partial payments as directed by the court but warned that technical and administrative challenges could delay the process for weeks or even months. According to court filings, the USDA cited the complexity of recalibrating state payment systems and determining individual benefit levels for tens of millions of recipients. As reported by the Detroit Free Press, about 1.4 million Michigan residents alone rely on SNAP, highlighting the broad impact of these delays.
The legal wrangling continued as community organizations and cities that had sued the administration pressed the court to enforce its order. They argued that the government’s delay in paying at least partial benefits was causing real harm and called for a restraining order to compel the release of withheld SNAP funds. U.S. District Court Judge John McConnell in Rhode Island scheduled an emergency hearing for November 6 to address these concerns and determine whether the administration was in violation of his order.
The broader political context added another layer of complexity. While Republicans held the majority in both chambers of Congress, they needed Democratic votes to pass a resolution to fund the government. Democrats, however, refused to provide those votes without negotiations on other pressing issues, including the looming expiration of expanded healthcare subsidies. The standoff left millions of Americans in limbo, with no clear resolution in sight.
The SNAP program itself has seen significant changes over recent years. During the COVID-19 pandemic, SNAP expenditures surged as unemployment soared and food insecurity rates climbed. Federal data shows that spending peaked at $128 billion in 2021, up from $93 billion the previous year, with enrollment also rising sharply. The Biden administration later updated SNAP to better reflect the real cost of a nutritious meal. However, both enrollment and spending began to decline in the final year of Biden’s term, and federal spending on SNAP has decreased each year from 2021 to 2024, according to USDA data cited by Axios.
Despite these policy shifts, the current crisis has laid bare the vulnerabilities in the nation’s safety net. Food banks, already stretched thin, have been unable to fully compensate for the shortfall in SNAP benefits. Policy experts and advocates argue that the federal government has the resources to fund benefits without delay, and that doing so would be far simpler and less painful for those affected. As Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward and a plaintiff in the case, wrote in response to Trump’s latest post, "This is immoral. See you in court."
For millions of Americans—families, seniors, and children—the uncertainty continues. As the legal and political battles play out, the question of when and how SNAP benefits will be restored remains unresolved, leaving those who depend on the program waiting and hoping for relief.
