States sue to block new limits on SNAP access for immigrants

EUGENE, Ore. (CN) — A coalition of states on Wednesday asked a court to block new guidance that restricts food stamp benefits to certain non-U.S. citizen groups.

Washington, joined by 20 other states and the District of Columbia, accuses the Trump administration’s U.S. Department of Agriculture of illegally rewriting the rules for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, called SNAP.

“SNAP benefits ensure Washingtonians, including seniors, children, and people living with disabilities, have enough to eat every day,” Washington Attorney General Nick Brown said in a statement. “Now, without any warning or legal basis, USDA is trying to rip these benefits away from green card holders in our communities.”

On Oct. 31, the USDA issued new guidance detailing the changes to the program eligibility. Those changes both narrowed the eligibility for refugees, asylum recipients and other noncitizen groups admitted to the country through humanitarian programs and “simultaneously created a set of massive penalties tied to state error rates in issuing payments to SNAP beneficiaries,” the states say.

The changes to program eligibility were part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which was enacted in July. However, the USDA didn’t issue the guidance to states until Oct. 31, and the states argue that the guidance “goes beyond the act” and arbitrarily excludes many lawful permanent residents.

On Nov. 1, the USDA then announced that it would end the 120-day grace period for states to make changes without facing financial penalties. The states say this change wrongly started the 120-day clock at the time the bill was signed rather than the time the guidance was issued.

As a result, states only had a single day, on the weekend and amid a federal shutdown, to make the changes or face penalties.

“The federal government’s shameful quest to take food away from children and families continues,” New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. “USDA has no authority to arbitrarily cut entire groups of people out of the SNAP program, and no one should go hungry because of the circumstances of their arrival to this country.”

Before the One Big Beautiful Bill Act went into effect, those who entered the U.S. as refugees or were granted asylum were eligible for SNAP, as well as many who were granted humanitarian parole. The bill eliminated those categories of eligibility, but it doesn’t prohibit those individuals from becoming eligible if they become lawful permanent residents, or green card holders.

The new guidance requires the states to revisit work that had already been done after the One Big Beautiful Bill Act announced eligibility changes, as the guidance is more restrictive. Now, the states say they are in an “untenable position.”

“The states have been asked to implement overly narrow eligibility provisions, which will likely increase public distrust of the SNAP program, may increase litigation risk for the states, and will chill public participation in SNAP,” the states write.

The timing of the lawsuit is not lost on the plaintiff states.

“It’s wild that we’re here the day before Thanksgiving,” Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield said in a statement. “We’re the wealthiest country in the world, and no one should go hungry.”

Rayfield added that he initially thought the memo must be a mistake.

“The law is clear, and this is not how you treat people,” Rayfield said.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Oregon, follows a letter 21 states sent to USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins last week formally asking the department to retract the guidance.

Joining Oregon, Washington and New York in the lawsuit are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia.

A USDA spokesperson declined to comment.