U.S. Supreme Court police stand behind a security fence in front of the court building covered with construction scaffolding on the first day of the Supreme Court’s new term, October 6, 2025, in Washington, DC.
Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images
A federal appeals court in Boston late Sunday flatly rejected for the second time the Trump administration’s request to block a lower court judge’s order to pay the full amount of SNAP benefits to 42 million Americans during the government shutdown.
However, following an earlier Supreme Court ruling, the judge’s order remains on hold until at least Tuesday night.
This gives the administration time to return to the Supreme Court and seek a permanent stay of the order pending appeal of the case.
Sunday’s ruling by a three-judge panel of the First Circuit Court of Appeals came a day after the U.S. Department of Agriculture threatened states that have been issuing full benefits since Friday with fines “if they do not cancel” the benefits.
And it came hours after the Senate narrowly passed the first phase of a bipartisan agreement that could reopen the government within days and fully fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program through next September.
Circuit Court Judge Julie Rickelman said in a panel ruling Sunday that “certain events prior to this case cannot be ignored when considering the district court’s equity balance.” “As the district court found, ‘this is a problem that could have been avoided.'”
“The records here show that the government has been on hold for nearly a month with partial payments not ready, while those who rely on SNAP have not received benefits a week into November,” Rickelman wrote.
“Given these unique facts, we cannot conclude that the district court abused its discretion in requiring full payment of November’s SNAP benefits in order to effectuate October 31[the government’s failure to comply with the temporary injunction].”
The Trump administration broke decades of precedent on Oct. 24 by saying it would not pay out SNAP benefits in November because Congress had not allocated funds for the program or any other government program since the government shutdown began Oct. 1. Past administrations paid full SNAP benefits during other government shutdowns.
The administration rejected the idea of the remaining $4.6 billion in emergency funds that Congress appropriated specifically for the SNAP backstop.
A group of plaintiffs, made up of nonprofit organizations, local governments, unions, and food retailers, sued the administration in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, seeking a judicial order forcing the administration to use reserve funds or other pools of funds to cover the full amount of SNAP benefits.
Judge Jack McConnell, who is overseeing the case, ordered the administration to use emergency funds to provide at least partial benefits as soon as possible and to explore whether other funds could be used.
Mr. McConnell on Thursday said he was ordering his administration to pay out the full amount of benefits, excluding the use of so-called Section 32 funds, days after saying his administration would only pay a portion of the benefits and that it would take time.
Mr. McConnell ordered the administration to use Section 32 funds to bridge the gap between the 65% of benefits the administration was scheduled to pay using emergency funds and the full amount of benefits. SNAP benefits cost about $8 billion each month.
The administration then asked the 1st Circuit for a temporary stay of McConnell’s order, but the appeals court denied it on Friday.
However, the appeals court also said it is “still considering the government’s motion to stay[Mr. McConnell’s order]pending appeal. We intend to rule on that motion as soon as possible.”
On Friday night, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, at the administration’s request, suspended McConnell’s order from taking effect and ordered the 1st Circuit to quickly rule on the stay request pending appeal.
Jackson’s order halted the enforcement of any judgment by the First Circuit for 48 hours.
