Lead: In the November 2025 federal shutdown, the White House’s decision to deliver partial payments for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) could leave many low-income households without aid. Court filings and policy memos made public this week show the administration’s payment method and guidance to states, producing delays and cuts for beneficiaries. Analysts estimate that about 1.2 million households—roughly five million people—might receive zero in November. Cities, states and nonprofit groups have returned to federal court to argue the government is not meeting orders to provide timely food assistance.
Key Takeaways
- About 42 million people are enrolled in SNAP nationwide; the program is the largest federal anti-hunger safety net.
- Analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities finds nearly 1.2 million households (about five million people) could receive $0 in SNAP benefits for November under the current partial-payment approach.
- The administration chose to fund benefits via partial payments and instructed states on a complex calculation method that may cause uneven payments and skipped disbursements.
- Cities, several states and nonprofit coalitions have asked a federal court to compel faster, fuller distribution of benefits amid concerns the White House guidance violates prior judicial orders.
- Advocates warn beneficiaries could face immediate food insecurity, while some state agencies say operational constraints will make rapid fixes difficult.
Background
SNAP provides monthly food-purchasing assistance to tens of millions of low-income Americans and is administered by states under federal rules. Enrollment stands at about 42 million people in 2025; benefit amounts depend on household size, income and local factors. Congress did not enact full-year appropriations before the shutdown, and the administration opted to continue program activity through a combination of partial funding mechanisms rather than a blanket, full appropriation.
In recent days the White House issued memos directing the Department of Agriculture—and through it, state agencies—to calculate and disburse benefits under a new partial-payment framework. Those memos, together with court filings in cases brought by municipalities and nonprofits, have revealed the practical effects of the policy and prompted fresh legal disputes. Historically, temporary funding disruptions of SNAP have led to delays but rarely to systemic zero-payment outcomes on this scale.
Main Event
On Nov. 5, 2025, public filings and policy documents made the mechanics of the partial-payment plan clearer: the administration instructed states to prorate available funds across active case loads, applying formulas that in some situations yield no payment for certain households. The guidance ties eligibility windows, benefit calculations and distribution timing to limited appropriated funds, rather than to the full statutory benefit level set for each household.
As states began reviewing guidance, analysts at policy groups ran simulations using the administration’s numbers and concluded that nearly 1.2 million households could receive $0 for November. That estimate—shared early with reporters—drove renewed courtroom filings from coalitions claiming that the federal government’s approach violates judges’ orders to ensure prompt benefit delivery this month.
State agencies have responded unevenly: some reported workarounds to prioritize the most vulnerable recipients, while others warned that the new calculation steps are operationally complex and will require days to implement. Municipal leaders and anti-hunger organizations say any delay of full benefits will cause immediate hardship for families who rely on SNAP for grocery purchases.
Analysis & Implications
Practically, the White House partial-payment design shifts the burden of reconciling federal shortfalls onto states, which must interpret federal guidance while managing automated enrollment systems, vendor schedules and outreach. States with older technology or fewer staffing resources face a higher risk of implementation errors and delayed payments; those problems translate directly into food insecurity for recipients.
Legally, plaintiffs in several cases argue that existing court orders require the government to take steps that ensure timely benefit distribution. The administration counters that appropriations constraints limit what it can lawfully commit. That legal dispute will likely determine whether courts require an alternative federal approach or accept the partial-payment framework as permissible during a funding lapse.
Economically, missing or reduced SNAP benefits can have immediate ripple effects: families cut back on purchases, creating short-term drops in grocery sales and local economic activity, while food banks and emergency providers face increased demand. In the longer term, interrupted benefits can worsen health outcomes and increase other public costs, such as emergency medical care.
Comparison & Data
| Measure | 2025 SNAP Baseline | Estimated Affected (Nov.) |
|---|---|---|
| People Enrolled | 42,000,000 | — |
| Households Potentially $0 | — | ~1,200,000 households (~5,000,000 people) |
| Primary Source of Estimate | USDA enrollment data | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities analysis |
The table compares overall SNAP enrollment with the CBPP estimate of households that could receive no payment in November under the current partial-payment rules. These figures are drawn from public enrollment statistics and policy analyses that applied the administration’s guidance to typical benefit calculations.
Reactions & Quotes
Advocates and analysts responded swiftly after the numbers circulated, saying the administration’s approach understates the human cost of interrupted benefits. Legal coalitions have pressed courts for orders to correct or supersede the White House guidance.
“Some households are not going to get any benefits under this.”
Dottie Rosenbaum, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
The CBPP line encapsulates the group’s core finding after reviewing government filings; the organization supplied its analysis to media and to court teams pursuing expedited relief for affected people.
“Plaintiffs have asked the court to require distributions that meet earlier judicial expectations for timeliness and access to benefits.”
Coalition court filing (municipalities, states, nonprofits)
Those plaintiffs argue federal guidance is insufficiently direct and that the administration must take concrete steps to ensure benefits reach households without added delay.
Unconfirmed
- The precise final tally of households that will receive $0 in November remains an estimate and may change as states apply the guidance or secure alternative funding.
- Whether the White House will revise its guidance or allocate funds differently before all state distributions are complete is not publicly confirmed.
Bottom Line
The administration’s choice to implement partial SNAP payments during the shutdown has produced an immediate legal and policy clash, with advocates warning of widespread hardship and some states preparing contingency plans. The CBPP estimate that about 1.2 million households could receive no payment in November highlights the severity, but the figure remains subject to change as states act and courts weigh relief requests.
Outcomes in the coming days will hinge on two factors: whether courts order the federal government to alter its payment approach, and whether states can operationally prioritize vulnerable recipients despite complex new guidance. For families relying on SNAP, the most urgent need is clear: fast, predictable access to benefits to avoid immediate food insecurity.
Sources
- The New York Times — news report with filed court documents and policy memos (media)
- Center on Budget and Policy Priorities — policy analysis and simulations on SNAP impacts (policy research)
- Federal court filings (PACER) — repository for the legal complaints and filings referenced by plaintiffs (official court records)
- White House — official statements and memos on funding and agency guidance (official)