Judge orders Trump to pay $4 billion in food stamps, rules administration acted "arbitrarily and capriciously"

U.S. District Judge John McConnell held a hastily called hearing on Nov. 6, 2025, and ruled that the Trump administration must fully cover SNAP benefits for November using Section 32 funds—permanent appropriations created by the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1935 that equal 30% of annual customs receipts. He said "people have gone without for too long" and that "not making payments for even another day is simply unacceptable." Relying on the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946, which requires federal agencies to provide reasoned explanations for major actions, McConnell found the administration acted "arbitrarily and capriciously" even though USDA had roughly $4.6 billion in emergency reserve funds available.

Judge McConnell ruled the administration acted "arbitrarily and capriciously" when it decided earlier in the week to provide only partial benefits. Under McConnell's order, the government must tap into billions of additional dollars held by the USDA in a separate pot of money so full SNAP benefits can be paid. The Administrative Procedure Act requires agencies to provide reasoned explanations for major actions, and the judge found the administration failed to meet this standard.

McConnell's order required the payments to be made to states by Nov. 7. The administration quickly appealed to the Supreme Court and asked for a stay to avoid paying full benefits while its appeal plays out. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson initially granted a temporary stay, but the full court later extended the pause on the order.

The hearing was the latest high-stakes court showdown over food stamps after the administration attempted to defund the program amid the government shutdown. McConnell and U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani of Massachusetts had made clear the USDA must tap contingency funds for at least partial benefits. The administration's refusal to use available funds created the legal conflict.

The Trump administration argued it opposed using the nearly $17 billion left in the child nutrition fund because it would endanger the nation's free and reduced-price school meals program, which serves about 29 million children a day. However, Judge McConnell found this concern was hypothetical and not projected to occur before May 2026, if at all. Congress could replenish those funds before then, he noted.

Nearly 42 million people rely on SNAP, most of them extremely low-income families with children, along with seniors and people with disabilities. Payments are made on a staggered basis over the course of a month. The shutdown forced the administration to make difficult choices about which programs to fund, but the judge found the administration had legal authority to provide full benefits.

States had already begun issuing full benefits following Friday guidance from the USDA before the Supreme Court intervened on Nov. 7. Pennsylvania, Kansas, and other states announced residents would start receiving full payments. The Supreme Court's stay created confusion as some states had already processed full benefits while others had not.

McConnell warned that "16 million children are immediately at risk of going hungry" if full SNAP benefits are not paid, underscoring the human impact of the administration's decision to hold back available funds.

The Rhode Island case, Rhode Island State Council of Churches v. Rollins, started with a temporary restraining order during the shutdown and moved quickly into an enforcement fight over whether USDA could sit on money it already had. After Judge McConnell ordered the agency to combine contingency funds with Section 32 dollars to pay full benefits, the administration rushed to the First Circuit and then the Supreme Court for a stay, turning a routine benefits program into a high-stakes separation-of-powers test.

Section 32 money normally pays for things like surplus crop purchases and child nutrition programs, not month-to-month SNAP benefits, which is why the administration claimed using it would hurt school meal programs. But the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1935 gives USDA broad authority to use those permanent appropriations in emergencies, and McConnell found that nothing in the record showed those school programs would actually run short before Congress could refill the account.

John McConnell

U.S. District Judge for Rhode Island

He held an emergency hearing on Nov. 6, 2025, and ruled the Trump administration must fully fund SNAP benefits by Nov. 7. He said the administration acted "arbitrarily and capriciously" by deciding to provide only partial benefits when full funding was available. He was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2011.

Skye Perryman

President and CEO of Democracy Forward

She represented plaintiffs in the Rhode Island case and called McConnell's ruling "a major victory for millions of Americans who receive federal food benefits." She leads Democracy Forward, a progressive legal advocacy group founded in 2017 that filed the lawsuit challenging the administration's SNAP funding decisions.

Tyler Becker

Justice Department Lawyer

He argued during the Nov. 6 hearing that the government had resolved all burdens it was responsible for and there was nothing more the USDA could do after releasing contingency fund money to states. He represented the Trump administration in defending its decision to provide only partial SNAP benefits during the shutdown.

Contact House Appropriations Committee about SNAP funding

Demand that Congress include full SNAP funding in any shutdown resolution and investigate why the administration refused to use available funds. The committee oversees USDA appropriations and can hold oversight hearings on the administration's SNAP funding decisions.

Contact state SNAP agency about benefit timing

Call your state's SNAP agency to ask when full November benefits will be loaded onto EBT cards. Some states began issuing full benefits before the Supreme Court stay, creating confusion about payment status.