Supreme Court Temporarily Blocks Full SNAP Payments to 42 Million Americans

The Supreme Court on Friday evening, November 7, 2025, temporarily blocked a federal court order requiring the Trump administration to provide full SNAP benefits to approximately 42 million Americans for November during the ongoing government shutdown. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson issued the temporary stay to give the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit more time to consider the administration’s request for longer emergency relief. The ruling came hours after states had begun distributing full benefits following U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr.’s Thursday order, forcing states to revert to partial payments.

The legal battle centered on the Trump administration’s refusal to fully fund SNAP despite having $8 billion in available funds. The Agriculture Department had tapped a $4 billion emergency contingency fund (covering approximately half of the monthly SNAP budget) but claimed it could not locate another $4 billion needed for full payments. Judge McConnell rejected this argument and gave the administration 24 hours to comply with full funding. On Friday morning, states began distributing full benefits to EBT cards before the Supreme Court intervened late in the day.

The administration argued that redirecting money as ordered by the lower court would “harm other child nutrition programs” and contended that Congress must provide additional funding. This position contradicted the reality that the administration had chosen not to deploy available contingency funds, effectively weaponizing hunger as political leverage in Trump’s standoff with Congress. The approximately 42 million Americans who rely on SNAP—predominantly low-income families with children, seniors, and individuals with disabilities—faced uncertainty about whether they would receive adequate food assistance during the holiday season.

The Supreme Court’s intervention in the SNAP case demonstrated the Court’s willingness to grant emergency stays in Trump administration cases, even when lower courts found clear statutory violations. The temporary nature of Justice Jackson’s order meant the fundamental question remained unresolved: whether the Trump administration must use available federal funds to provide legally mandated nutrition assistance during a government shutdown, or whether it can selectively withhold benefits to pressure Congress. The case exemplified how the shutdown manufactured crises affecting the most vulnerable Americans, with judicial proceedings determining whether millions would have sufficient food assistance.