The Supreme Court on Tuesday extended an order that blocks full Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) payments, prolonging a chaotic situation as Congress moves to end the partial federal government shutdown. The extension keeps the status quo for a few more days, with the order set to expire just before midnight Thursday.
Because of the dispute, some SNAP recipients in certain states have received full monthly benefits while others have received none; some states issued partial payments. The Senate has approved legislation to reopen the government and replenish SNAP funds, and the House could vote as soon as Wednesday. If the shutdown ends, the program that helps about 42 million Americans buy groceries would restart, though the timing for restoring full payments would vary by state.
The justices opted for a temporary measure that avoids resolving the underlying legal questions raised by lower court rulings that ordered full payments during the shutdown. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only justice who said she would have immediately reinstated the lower court orders; she did not elaborate on her reasoning. Jackson had signed the initial order that temporarily froze those payments.
State officials and advocates say it is generally easier to resume full benefits quickly than to top up partial payments, but technical challenges may complicate issuing remaining amounts in states that already distributed partial benefits. Carolyn Vega, a policy analyst at the advocacy group Share Our Strength, warned that states that made partial disbursements could face additional hurdles in sending the remainder.
The pause in benefits has created urgent need for many families. In Pennsylvania, for example, some residents received full November benefits on Friday, yet others remained unpaid. Jim Malliard, 41, of Franklin, who cares full time for his disabled wife and a teen daughter with serious medical complications, said by Monday he had received nothing and had only $10 left in his account. He described sleepless nights and mounting anxiety as he tried to stretch food supplies.
The political turmoil has prompted local efforts to help. In Carthage, New York, teacher Ashley Oxenford set out a small food pantry in her front yard for neighbors affected by the lapse in benefits.
The dispute began after the Trump administration paused SNAP funding following the end of appropriations in October. That decision prompted lawsuits and a patchwork of swift and sometimes contradictory rulings. On Oct. 31, two judges ordered at least partial SNAP funding; the administration initially provided up to 65% of regular benefits. A judge later ruled the government must fully fund SNAP for November, even if that required dipping into funds the administration said must be reserved for other emergencies. The Supreme Court temporarily paused that order.
An appeals court on Monday had directed that full funding resume, a mandate that was set to take effect Tuesday night before the Supreme Court extended the pause. Meanwhile, the Senate’s plan to reopen the government includes replenishing SNAP funds. Speaker Mike Johnson called members of the House back to consider the bipartisan deal reached in the Senate. President Trump said Sunday that “it looks like we’re getting close to the shutdown ending,” but had not committed publicly to signing the measure.
In a Supreme Court filing, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that courts should not reallocate government resources and that Congress must reopen the government to resolve the crisis. After Tuesday’s ruling, Attorney General Pam Bondi thanked the court on social media for allowing Congress to continue its work. Plaintiffs — a coalition of cities and nonprofit groups that challenged the SNAP pause — blamed the Department of Agriculture for the confusion, saying the “chaos was sown by USDA’s delays and intransigence,” not by the district court’s attempts to mitigate harm to families in need.