**Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Opposes Supreme Court Stay on SNAP Funding Amid Shutdown**

Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson broke from the majority on the nation’s highest court, indicating she would have denied the Trump administration’s request to stay court orders requiring the government to fully fund SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court extended a stay of the order, initially granted on November 7, through 11:59 p.m. on November 13. The released order noted that Justice Jackson would have denied both the extension and the original request for a stay. No other justices were named as dissenting.

**Why It Matters**

The Trump administration made headlines when it ceased distributing SNAP funds after October, citing the ongoing government shutdown that began October 1—the longest in United States history. About 1 in 8 Americans receive SNAP benefits, making the program a lifeline for over 40 million people.

Following the shutdown, several lawsuits were filed. Judges initially ruled that the government must at least partially fund SNAP, a decision the Trump administration accepted. The situation escalated when a judge later ordered full funding to resume, prompting the administration to seek a stay from the Supreme Court. The administration argued that fully funding the program would require tapping into emergency reserves earmarked for other situations.

On Monday, an appeals court mandated that full funding resume the following night. However, the Supreme Court handed down an extension of the stay before the order could take effect.

**Key Developments**

Solicitor General D. John Sauer filed the motion to stay the orders on November 7. In his application, Sauer wrote:

> “Given the imminent, irreparable harms posed by these orders, which require the government to transfer an estimated $4 billion by tonight, the Solicitor General respectfully requests an immediate administrative stay of the orders pending the resolution of this application by no later than 9:30 p.m. this evening.”

Sauer also stated that the government had exhausted the entirety of its SNAP contingency reserve—over $5 billion—which would only be enough for partial payments in November. He warned:

> “If allowed to stand, this decision will metastasize and sow further shutdown chaos. Every beneficiary of a federal program could run into court, point to an agency’s general discretion to prioritize funding, and claim that failing to prioritize their chosen program was arbitrary and capricious.”

Respondents’ attorneys countered that over 40 million Americans reliant on SNAP had gone more than a week without essential assistance for food:

> “Any further stay would prolong that irreparable harm and add to the chaos the government has unleashed, with lasting impacts on the administration of SNAP. The government has offered no defensible justification for that result. The administrative stay should be terminated, and no further stay should be granted.”

**What People Are Saying**

Solicitor General Sauer further argued:

> “The district court is commandeering sensitive funding-allocation decisions in the middle of a shutdown, in ways that frustrate efforts to end that shutdown and result in new appropriations for all of these programs. Instead of allowing Congress to do that work, the district court’s order directs USDA to redirect billions of dollars from one program to another, with no means available to recoup those funds once soon spent. This Court has not hesitated to intervene in similar cases where the lower courts have commandeered the Executive’s prerogatives over allocating limited resources.”

Meanwhile, attorneys for the respondents contended:

> “The government’s remaining claim of irreparable harm, that the district court’s orders are interfering with negotiation tactics in the government shutdown, only confirms what has been clear all along—that the government is leveraging SNAP to gain partisan political advantage in the shutdown fight. This Court should not participate in that effort. There is no justification for the Court to step in to stop needed benefits from flowing to the children, seniors, low-wage workers, veterans, and others who rely on them for food.”

**What Happens Next**

The Supreme Court’s stay is currently set to expire on Thursday at 11:59 p.m. The outcome will determine whether tens of millions will see their SNAP benefits restored, or if the chaos and uncertainty will continue.

*This article includes reporting by The Associated Press.*
https://www.newsweek.com/snap-benefits-funding-divides-supreme-court-11035669