In an unprecedented legal move, twenty-six states have taken legal action against the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), alleging the wrongful suspension of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits due to the ongoing government shutdown. Filed on Tuesday in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts, the lawsuit argues that the USDA misinterpreted its ability to utilize contingency funds designated for such crises.

The USDA announced the suspension of SNAP benefits in a letter dated October 24, 2025, citing the absence of a new appropriations bill as the primary reason. This decision affects over 40 million Americans who rely on SNAP for essential nutritional support, including working families, elderly adults, and people with disabilities.

At the heart of the dispute is the use of two contingency funds established by Congress. The first fund, created in 2024 with $3 million, is designed for necessary operational expenditures. The second, known as Section 32, hinges on the provisions of 7 USC § 612(c), which allows its use under certain circumstances. The states' complaint asserts that available funds, including these contingencies, legally mandate the USDA to continue SNAP benefits.

However, the USDA countered this argument in a memorandum also issued on October 24. The department contends that these funds are only accessible when an appropriations bill is passed but is insufficient, not when no bill has been passed at all. Furthermore, the USDA suggests reserving these funds for other critical needs such as responses to natural disasters.

This legal contention surfaces amid a broader political context, with increasing bipartisan support in Congress for a standalone bill to secure SNAP funding during the shutdown. Prominent Republicans have expressed openness to this approach, aligning with likely Democratic backing, which could pave the way for a legislative solution.

The lawsuit has stirred significant attention, highlighting the critical dependency on federal nutrition assistance by millions and raising questions about the government's obligations in times of fiscal impasse. As the legal proceedings commence with a scheduled hearing on Thursday, the outcome could set a vital precedent for how government shutdowns handle federally mandated aid programs in the future.