Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
The Trump administration signaled Tuesday that it will begin cutting off federal food-assistance funds to most Democratic-led states next week after they refused to hand over personal information on millions of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program recipients, a move governors and attorneys general called an unlawful act of political retaliation.
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins told Cabinet officials that 29 Republican-run states have complied with a February request from the Agriculture Department seeking recipients’ names, immigration statuses and other personal details, which she said were needed to “root out fraud.” Twenty-one states — including California, New York and Minnesota — rejected the demand, calling it unnecessary, intrusive and legally dubious.
“So as of next week, we have begun and will begin to stop moving federal funds into those states,” Rollins said, arguing the data was essential to “protect the American taxpayer.”
The decision threatens benefits for millions of households that rely on SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, which supports nearly 42 million Americans. The agency did not specify how many families could lose benefits or how states should continue providing aid without federal funding.
States denounce the move as punitive and unlawful
State officials blasted the administration’s threat as both illegal and dangerous.
“Genuine question: Why is the Trump administration so hellbent on people going hungry?” New York Gov. Kathy Hochul wrote on X.
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison accused the White House of trying to “punish political rivals,” noting that a federal court has already ruled against the administration’s efforts to condition SNAP funding on the disclosure of personal data.
“It’s nothing short of ridiculous that the Trump administration is once again trying to withhold SNAP funding over data sharing after a court clearly barred them from doing so,” Ellison said.
Court order already blocks punitive funding cuts
Earlier this fall, 21 states and the District of Columbia sued the administration, arguing that the data demand was part of a broader effort to “amass Americans’ sensitive, personal data and misuse that data for unauthorized purposes.” The lawsuit cited agreements between the IRS, Health and Human Services and Immigration and Customs Enforcement that would have allowed access to some of the information the Agriculture Department was demanding.
A federal judge in San Francisco issued a preliminary injunction in October prohibiting the administration from pulling SNAP funds as punishment for states’ refusing to comply. The Agriculture Department has until Dec. 15 to decide whether it will appeal — but the judge has already rejected the administration’s request to temporarily pause the injunction during any appeal.
Lingering effects of shutdown and political pressure
The dispute comes weeks after a record-long federal government shutdown halted SNAP funding altogether, forcing many low-income families to go without assistance before the shutdown ended Nov. 12. The episode added urgency to legal challenges over whether the administration can cut off benefits, even temporarily, in pursuit of contested policy goals.
The standoff underscores the Trump administration’s increasingly aggressive posture toward states that resist its demands on immigration enforcement, welfare programs and voting systems. In multiple cases, courts have blocked efforts to impose new conditions on long-standing federal programs without congressional approval.
With the legal battle unresolved — and tens of millions of Americans’ food assistance hanging in the balance — states and advocacy groups say the administration’s latest threat signals an escalation that could trigger another wave of court challenges before any funds are halted.
