Today's News: Trump Administration Directs States to Undo Full SNAP Benefits

This command followed a series of conflicting court rulings, including a federal judge’s order to disburse full benefits, which was then temporarily paused by the Supreme Court.

Terrence Dorsey

Nov 09, 2025

Photo: Spencer Platt

Date: November 8-9, 2025
Summary: Amidst a federal government shutdown, the Trump administration’s Agriculture Department issued a directive ordering states to “immediately undo” any actions to provide full Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for November, threatening financial penalties for non-compliance. This command followed a series of conflicting court rulings, including a federal judge’s order to disburse full benefits, which was then temporarily paused by a Supreme Court justice. The legal back-and-forth has left millions of low-income Americans in uncertainty regarding their food assistance, prompting several states to defy the federal directive and explore legal options to ensure continued aid.

Sources

Key Points

A federal government shutdown is the underlying cause for the uncertainty surrounding federal program funding, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
The Trump administration’s Agriculture Department issued a memo on Saturday, November 8, 2025, ordering states to “immediately undo” any steps taken to issue full SNAP benefits for November 2025.
States that do not comply with the directive face potential financial penalties, including the cancellation of the federal share of state administrative costs and liability for overissuances.
There has been a rapid succession of legal rulings: a federal judge initially ordered full SNAP benefits, which was then temporarily halted by a Supreme Court justice on Friday, November 7, 2025, sending the case back to a lower appeals court.
Many states had already begun or completed disbursing full SNAP benefits to residents following earlier court orders, leading to confusion and defiance regarding the USDA’s “undo” directive.
The situation affects approximately one in eight Americans who rely on SNAP for food assistance.
State officials, particularly Democratic governors, are criticizing the administration’s actions and pursuing legal challenges or advising residents to continue spending any received benefits.

Unique Highlights

The New York Times details the specific legal timeline, including Judge John J. McConnell Jr.’s rulings and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s temporary halt. It mentions Representative Angie Craig’s statement that the administration would “rather go door to door, taking away people’s food.” The article also notes Attorney General Pam Bondi heads the Justice Department’s antitrust division, which is investigating meatpacking companies.
NBC News reports that Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey threatened to sue the Trump administration and advised residents to continue spending their funds. The article also mentions the USDA’s earlier website message stating “the well has run dry” for SNAP benefits and blaming Democrats.
The Washington Post specifies that the administration is demanding states issue only “partial payments of about 65 percent of a usual SNAP benefit.” It cites Carl Tobias, a law professor, on the potential illegality of clawing back benefits without due process. The article also includes comments from Kevin Hassett, President Donald Trump’s longest-serving economic adviser, defending the administration’s actions on CBS News’s “Face the Nation.” It notes the Rhode Island judge ordered tapping a “$23 billion fund for school lunch and child nutrition programs” for full SNAP benefits.
CNN provides specific figures for states that had issued full benefits, stating Wisconsin loaded benefits for nearly 700,000 residents, leading to a $20 million overdraft, and Kansas issued nearly $32 million to approximately 86,000 households. It also quotes Maryland Democratic Governor Wes Moore describing the situation as “intentional chaos.” The article mentions North Carolina paused the issuance of full benefits after having issued partial ones, and quotes Governor Josh Stein.

Contrasting Details

The Washington Post states the Rhode Island judge, John J. McConnell Jr., ordered the administration to tap into a “$23 billion fund for school lunch and child nutrition programs” to pay for full SNAP benefits. In comparison, The New York Times states Judge McConnell required the government to use both “emergency funds and its additional account” to provide full benefits, with the “additional account” largely comprising tariff revenue. CNN clarifies that the judge “mandated the agency shift tariff revenue meant for child nutrition programs to pay full SNAP benefits for November.” While the underlying source (tariff revenue for child nutrition) is consistent, the specific phrasing of the fund name or type varies slightly across the articles.
The New York Times states the Trump administration argued “legal, technical and budgetary constraints” prevented it from transferring money for full SNAP benefits. The Washington Post elaborates on this, noting USDA’s argument that the child nutrition fund is “separate from SNAP” and that the government lacks funds due to “congressional failure” to appropriate new money, and that “raiding an entirely different program” could lead to a shortfall in school meals. These are not direct contradictions but offer different levels of detail on the administration’s justification.

The Newsie Project uses AI to summarize, compare, and contrast the reporting of the major US and world online news sources.

This is an evolving project. Tools, approaches, and output formats will change over time. The Newsie Project does not attempt to provide a definitive capsule of any news story. While the incidence of errors in these summaries is low, and I attempt to spot-check details, AI tools can hallucinate. Please click through and read the articles for details (some may be paywalled).

The Newsie Project