Theo Wells-Spackman is a Report for America corps member who reports for VTDigger.
Federal judges in two separate cases, including the multistate lawsuit that Vermont Attorney General Charity Clark joined on Tuesday, have rejected legal arguments made by the Trump administration against releasing emergency funding for November food assistance.
In Massachusetts District Court on Friday, Judge Indira Talwani said Clark and colleagues from 24 states and the District of Columbia were “likely to succeed” in their claims against the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Though Talwani stopped short of issuing the temporary restraining order sought by states against the USDA, in an order on Friday she found the USDA’s argument that existing contingency funding is not legally available for its Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program “erroneous.”
“While this case isn’t over, today is a good day in our fight,” Clark said in a statement on Friday following Talwani’s order.
Talwani gave federal officials until Monday to “advise the court whether they will authorize at least reduced SNAP benefits for November.”
In a separate decision in Rhode Island District Court, Judge John McConnell ordered the Trump administration to use its contingency funding to continue distributing food benefits. McConnell ruled in favor of a group of city officials and community organizations, who sought a temporary restraining order against the USDA’s actions along the same lines as Clark’s lawsuit.
“Two federal courts today told the Trump Administration what they are doing with SNAP benefits is wrong,” Clark said in her statement. “I couldn’t agree more and we will keep fighting.”
These decisions occur as Vermont takes steps to provide state-funded stopgap measures while federal funding remains in question for food assistance.
On Wednesday, the state’s Emergency Board approved a $6.5 million plan that funds 3SquaresVT — Vermont’s version of SNAP — for the first half of November. The board will reconvene on or before Nov. 13 to weigh further steps.
