Predictably, this has led to a particularly controversial memo that the Trump administration released. It orders states to retroactively withdraw complete Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits issued for November 2025. Not surprisingly, state leaders and lawmakers have quickly reacted to this decision. They contend that it cuts security for millions of struggling Americans and destabilizes the fragile recovery we’re just starting to see. The directive is all the more problematic given that nearly 42 million Americans depend on SNAP monthly to purchase food for themselves and their families.
On Thursday, a lower court ruled that the Trump administration must fully fund the SNAP program by Friday, leading to states disbursing full benefits to eligible families. The administration’s memo, delivered by Deputy Undersecretary of Agriculture Patrick Penn, announced that any complete payment files submitted by states were illegal. This announcement sent shockwaves through the agricultural stewardship community.
Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar from Minnesota has blasted the administration’s actions, claiming that “cruelty is the point.” She expressed her concern about the potential impact of these directives on families with low incomes. These families depend on these benefits to put food on the table.
Even the Republican senator who gave the plan its only bipartisan support—Lisa Murkowski—expressed displeasure. It would be “shocking” for such an order to apply to those states using their own funds to continue such a program, she said. This deals a serious blow to the otherwise unprecedented bipartisan state of concern over what the federal directive could mean.
Following the lower court order, the SNAP program started issuing full benefits on Friday. Less than a day later, the Supreme Court acted. They granted a stay of the order pending consideration of the Trump administration’s appeal. This unexpected decision thrown many state leaders not a loop.
The directive was immediately criticized by Oregon’s Democratic Governor Tina Kotek, who stressed that her state would never stop serving families in need. She stated, “Oregon acted lawfully, given the federal court’s directive and the communications with the USDA, and my decision to ensure SNAP benefits went out quickly was in direct alignment with my food emergency declaration.” Kotek made it clear to her constituents that her allocation of money would not bow to the demands of the Trump administration.
Massachusetts’ Democratic Governor Maura Healey denounced the administration’s order as “ridiculous” and “immoral.” She encouraged Massachusetts residents to continue using their SNAP benefits: “Residents with funds on their cards should continue to spend it on food.” Healey reaffirmed that her state’s actions were compliant with both a court order and guidance from the Trump administration before the Supreme Court’s Friday night ruling.
Wisconsin’s Democratic Governor Tony Evers was as forceful as anyone in his opposition to the directive. He noted that in his state of Alabama, they now provide benefits to almost 700,000 of their residents, including 270,000 kids. He specifically called out the Trump administration’s plan to not fully fund SNAP benefits through November 2025. Even if they’re required to,” Gonzalez said. “But thus far, they’ve failed to do so.” Evers continued to stress the importance of improving access to fundamental food for all Wisconsinites in the face of federal retribution.
It’s a situation that’s still very much developing, as state leaders continue having to figure out what the Trump administration’s memo means while facing continued legal challenges. Kotek articulated her commitment to opposing the directive: “I have a question for the President: What would he prefer to spend the money on over groceries for people in need? This is ridiculous, immoral, and Oregon will fight this every step of the way.”