A federal judge delivered an unprecedented judicial rebuke to President Trump after he openly defied a court order to fully fund food assistance for 42 million Americans during a government shutdown.
Story Highlights
- U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell Jr. ordered immediate full funding of SNAP after Trump administration made only partial payments
- Trump publicly refused compliance, stating SNAP would not be funded until government reopens
- 42 million Americans, including 16 million children, face immediate food insecurity risks
- Judge condemned the defiance as unprecedented harm that “should never happen in America”
Presidential Defiance Sparks Constitutional Crisis
President Trump’s direct refusal to comply with Judge McConnell’s court order represents an extraordinary confrontation between executive and judicial branches. The administration received clear written instructions on November 1, 2025, to fully fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for November, yet made only partial payments by the November 5 deadline. Trump’s public statements explicitly rejecting judicial authority have created a constitutional crisis unseen in modern American governance.
The Department of Justice attempted to defend the administration’s position by arguing partial compliance and blaming states for administrative delays. However, Judge McConnell rejected these explanations, emphasizing that millions of vulnerable Americans cannot wait for political gamesmanship to end. The DOJ has signaled intent to appeal, further prolonging uncertainty for families dependent on food assistance.
Humanitarian Crisis Unfolds During Government Shutdown
The withholding of SNAP benefits affects 42 million Americans, with children comprising 16 million of those at risk. Food banks and charitable organizations face overwhelming demand they cannot meet without federal support. Diane Yentel, president of the National Council of Nonprofits, warned that halting SNAP would create catastrophic burdens on emergency food providers already stretched beyond capacity during the prolonged shutdown.
State agencies administering SNAP programs find themselves caught between federal funding shortfalls and desperate local populations. The administrative chaos compounds the humanitarian crisis, as families struggle to understand when or if their benefits will arrive. Low-income families, elderly individuals, and disabled Americans who rely on SNAP for basic nutrition face impossible choices between food and other essential needs.
Legal Precedent and Rule of Law at Stake
Judge McConnell’s November 6 order represents more than emergency relief—it establishes crucial precedent about executive accountability to judicial authority. Legal experts note the unprecedented nature of a sitting president’s open defiance of federal court orders regarding social welfare programs. The judge’s strong language condemning the administration’s actions reflects serious concern about erosion of constitutional checks and balances.
Cities and nonprofit organizations that brought the original lawsuit argue the administration’s actions violate both legal obligations and moral imperatives. Their legal challenge highlights fundamental questions about whether political disputes can justify withholding court-ordered assistance from vulnerable populations. The case may establish important boundaries for future executive responses to judicial mandates during government crises.
Sources:
Good Morning America: Judge orders Trump administration to fully fund SNAP benefits
ABC News: Judge orders Trump administration to fully fund SNAP benefits
Axios: SNAP hearing Massachusetts state lawsuit Trump
KSTP: Federal judge orders Trump administration to fully fund SNAP benefits in November
