Lead: The White House announced it will issue only partial Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) payments for November as the federal shutdown extends into its sixth week, a decision revealed in court filings on Monday. The move follows conflicting court orders and last-week rulings that had pressed the administration to resume benefits; officials said partial payments will cover roughly 50% of current allotments for eligible households. The step arrives alongside separate short-term funding for WIC and fresh legal challenges from states, cities and advocacy groups seeking full payments.
Key Takeaways
- The administration says partial SNAP disbursements in November will cover about 50% of eligible households’ usual allotments, per court filings.
- Roughly 42 million Americans rely on SNAP, making it the nation’s largest anti-hunger program.
- The White House shifted $450 million to the Women, Infants, and Children program (WIC) to sustain benefits; WIC serves about 6.7 million women and children.
- WIC typically costs about $150 million per week; the administration previously tapped Section 32 tariff/customs revenue to cover program needs.
- Federal judges ordered the administration to explain SNAP funding decisions and set deadlines; one judge explicitly instructed the agency to resume full payments or provide partial benefits by a set date.
- Advocacy groups and several states are pursuing litigation to force full SNAP funding; Democracy Forward is reviewing additional legal options.
- Administration officials argue using Section 32 funds for SNAP would exceed congressional intent and is legally constrained, per a sworn declaration from Patrick A. Penn.
Background
The federal government has been partially closed since Oct. 1 following a budget impasse in Congress, disrupting many federal operations and benefit programs. SNAP, which historically draws on annual appropriations and contingency funding, faces a funding interruption when regular appropriations lapse. In recent weeks, courts pressed the administration to restore benefits after plaintiffs including cities, states and nonprofits sued to prevent imminent hunger among recipients.
The White House has used alternative balances and reprogramming to preserve some services: officials authorized transfers to the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) and have intermittently relied on internal accounts to keep that program operating. But USDA leadership contends that the legal and statutory differences between WIC funding streams and SNAP prevent a straight reallocation of the same reserve money to fully cover food stamps.
Main Event
This Monday, the administration formalized plans in court filings indicating it would provision partial SNAP benefits for November rather than fully restoring standard allotments. The filings describe an emergency reserve allocation that would allow roughly half of a household’s usual SNAP benefit to be paid, while warning that logistical challenges could delay actual distribution by days or weeks in some states.
Judicial pressure has been acute. Two federal judges found irregularities in the government’s earlier refusal to fund SNAP this month; one judge, John J. McConnell Jr., ordered that full payments be made by Monday or partial payments by Wednesday, pushing the administration to respond quickly. The Agriculture Department replied by asserting legal limits on available accounts and the need to follow internal procedures to reprogram funds.
Advocacy groups, municipalities and several states immediately criticized the decision to deliver only partial aid. Plaintiffs who successfully obtained court orders to compel benefit restoration signaled they would continue litigation to compel full funding, arguing plaintiffs and their counsel that partial distributions are insufficient to avert hunger and economic hardship among low-income families and furloughed federal workers.
Analysis & Implications
The administration’s partial-payment approach addresses political and operational constraints but leaves large gaps in anti-hunger coverage. Covering about 50% of allotments for eligible households will significantly reduce purchasing power for many families who already allocate most of limited incomes to food. The risk of food insecurity will rise quickly in jurisdictions with longer provisioning delays.
Economically, reduced SNAP disbursements could ripple through local economies: SNAP benefits are typically spent quickly at grocery stores, supporting retail revenues and regional food supply chains. The Federal Reserve and other economic monitors have warned that a protracted shutdown could depress consumer spending and harm small businesses that contract with the government or serve federal employees.
Politically, the decision highlights a policy tension: the administration has shown willingness to reprogram funds to blunt some shutdown impacts (WIC) while resisting full SNAP financing, a program that has long been a target of Republicans seeking spending reforms. The legal arguments about statutory authority and ‘‘congressional intent’’ are likely to be litigated further, raising the possibility of additional court orders or injunctions.
Comparison & Data
| Program | Approx. Beneficiaries | Typical Weekly Cost | Recent Intervention |
|---|---|---|---|
| SNAP | ~42 million people | Varies (largest federal nutrition program) | Partial payments covering ~50% announced for November |
| WIC | 6.7 million women & children | ~$150 million/week | $450 million transferred from customs/Section 32 funds |
The table underscores scale differences: SNAP reaches many times more recipients than WIC, which complicates the use of Section 32 or similar smaller accounts to replicate the same solution for SNAP without additional appropriations or statutory authority. States also report surges in WIC enrollment and faster benefit depletion, demonstrating how uncertainty increases program strain.
Reactions & Quotes
“It is not enough to do the bare minimum — the administration should stop playing politics with hunger and use all available resources to ensure Americans can put food on the table.”
Amy Klobuchar (U.S. Senator, Democrat)
Context: Senator Klobuchar, a leading Democrat on agriculture issues, criticized the White House for offering only partial SNAP support and urged use of available funds to prevent disruptions.
“It shouldn’t take a court order to force our president to provide essential nutrition that Congress has made clear needs to be provided.”
Skye Perryman (President, Democracy Forward)
Context: Democracy Forward, which represented plaintiffs in litigation seeking full payments, said it would continue considering legal remedies after the administration announced partial disbursements.
“The agency does not believe the same [Section 32] account is available for SNAP due to the significant differences between the amounts at issue.”
Patrick A. Penn (Deputy Under Secretary, USDA declaration)
Context: USDA officials filed sworn declarations arguing legal limits on shifting Section 32 customs revenue from child nutrition programs to fully cover SNAP benefits.
Unconfirmed
- The exact timeline for when partial SNAP payments will reach individual households remains unclear and may vary by state and EBT system capacity.
- Whether additional administrative or legislative steps will allow rapid conversion of partial to full payments has not been confirmed and may depend on new court rulings or congressional action.
- Claims that Section 32 could easily cover full-month SNAP obligations conflict across filings and have not been definitively resolved by the courts.
Bottom Line
The administration’s choice to deliver only partial SNAP benefits in November is a stopgap that reduces immediate federal outlays but increases near-term food insecurity risks for millions. The decision reflects both legal caution from USDA officials about available authorities and a political calculus about how to manage the fiscal effects of a prolonged shutdown without new appropriations.
Expect continued litigation and possible new court orders in the coming days that could alter the rollout; states and anti-hunger organizations are likely to press for full restoration of benefits, while the White House maintains that statutory limits and internal procedures constrain its options. For families dependent on SNAP, the practical question is distribution timing and local implementation — the window before hardship grows is short.