Trump Administration Appeals Court Order on SNAP Funding for November

The Trump administration is contesting a federal judge’s order mandating full funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) for November, arguing that compliance would cause the government greater harm than the potential hunger faced by millions of low-income Americans. The administration’s appeal comes amid an ongoing government shutdown, which has led to cuts in food assistance.

In a recent filing with the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, the Justice Department claimed that the order issued by Judge John J. McConnell Jr. poses “significant and irreparable harm” to the federal government. The administration asserts that fulfilling the court’s requirement to allocate funds would be a more severe injury than the impact on approximately 42 million Americans who rely on SNAP benefits to purchase food.

The judge’s ruling mandated that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) utilize existing accounts to cover the shortfall in SNAP funding. The administration has appealed this decision twice, arguing that it infringes upon Congress’s authority over federal spending. They contend that the judiciary’s order undermines the separation of powers by compelling the executive branch to identify funds, claiming there is “no lawful basis” for such an action.

The Justice Department’s latest filing, submitted on November 7, 2025, emphasizes that the inability to spend already appropriated funds represents a greater harm to the government than the hunger and disruption caused by withholding assistance. The administration’s argument suggests that once funds are allocated, they cannot be unspent, a point that critics argue overlooks the immediate needs of vulnerable populations.

Judge McConnell has previously responded to the administration’s assertions, stating, “This should never happen in America,” referring to the government’s choice to allow citizens to face hunger while claiming a lack of resources.

The administration’s claim of fiscal incapacity is questioned by many, as the USDA reportedly manages multiple accounts with sufficient resources, including a $5 billion emergency reserve established by Congress to support SNAP during financial crises. Critics argue that the issue at hand is not a lack of funds but rather a political decision to prioritize administrative convenience over the essential needs of millions.

As the legal battle continues, the implications of this appeal extend beyond SNAP. If the administration’s argument prevails, it may set a precedent allowing the executive branch to evade statutory obligations based on claims of “irreparable harm,” potentially impacting various programs designed to support public welfare.

The outcome of this case could significantly affect the ability of low-income families, seniors, veterans, and children to access necessary food assistance during a critical period. As the government shutdown persists, the urgency of resolving this issue becomes increasingly vital for those who rely on SNAP.