A federal judge in Boston signaled her intention to intervene in a legal battle over the Trump administration’s refusal to use emergency funds for food stamp benefits, potentially ensuring continued assistance for millions of Americans amid a government shutdown.
During a hearing on Thursday, October 30, 2025, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani expressed skepticism towards the administration’s position and indicated she would likely rule in favor of the plaintiffs, a coalition of Democratic attorneys general and governors from 25 states and Washington, D.C. The lawsuit, filed earlier this week, challenges the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s decision not to tap into a $5.3 billion contingency fund to cover SNAP benefits for November, arguing it violates federal law that requires consistent funding for the program.
SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, provides critical food aid to approximately 42 million low-income Americans, with monthly costs ranging from $8.5 billion to $9 billion. The contingency fund, established for emergencies, has never been used in this manner during previous shutdowns, but Judge Talwani emphasized that Congress intended for such funds to be utilized in crises. She stated, ‘Right now, Congress has put money in an emergency fund for an emergency, and it’s hard for me to understand how this isn’t an emergency when there’s no money and a lot of people are needing their SNAP benefits.’
Throughout the hearing, Judge Talwani questioned the administration’s rationale, noting that federal law suggests reducing benefits rather than suspending them entirely. She said, ‘The idea that we’re going to do the absolutely most drastic thing, which is that there’s not just less money but no money, seems the farthest thing from what Congress intended.’ However, she acknowledged that benefits would be delayed and likely reduced if she orders the use of contingency funds, as the fund is insufficient to cover full November payments.
The government shutdown, now in its fourth week, has created widespread uncertainty, with courts increasingly intervening in emergency situations. Earlier this week, another federal judge blocked layoffs of federal workers, highlighting the judicial system’s role in mitigating shutdown impacts. In this case, if Judge Talwani issues an emergency order, it could compel the USDA to partially fund SNAP benefits, though states would need to adjust payment systems, potentially causing further delays.
The USDA had initially indicated in its shutdown contingency plan that contingency funds could be used for SNAP, but reversed course last week, stating that the funds are not legally available for regular benefits. This shift has drawn criticism and legal challenges, with plaintiffs arguing that the administration’s decision is arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.
Judge Talwani promised to work quickly to issue her decision later on Thursday, but the outcome remains uncertain. If she rules in favor of the states, it could set a precedent for how emergency funds are handled during future government impasses. Meanwhile, millions of SNAP recipients face anxiety over whether they will receive assistance in November, underscoring the human cost of political gridlock.
This development reflects the escalating tensions between the executive and judicial branches during the shutdown, with judges stepping in to address gaps in governance. As the stalemate continues, the resolution of this case could influence other pending lawsuits and shape the administration’s approach to funding essential services.