The lawsuit was filed by the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin. The governors of Kansas, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania also joined the complaint.

Earlier this month, USDA warned state agencies that there would be insufficient funds to support SNAP by the start of November. The lawsuit’s plaintiffs, however, argued there are enough emergency funds to aid states in distributing food aid at this time.

“Because of USDA’s actions, SNAP benefits will be delayed for the first time since the program’s inception,” the complaint states. “Worse still, USDA suspended SNAP benefits even though, on information and belief, it has funds available to it that are sufficient to fund all, or at least a substantial portion, of November SNAP benefits.”

USDA directed states in an Oct. 10 letter to withhold the issuance of November SNAP benefits to their residents. In a follow-up letter dated Oct. 24, the department disclosed it “is suspending all November 2025 benefit allotments until such time as sufficient federal funding is provided, or until FNS directs State agencies otherwise,” effective Nov. 1.

The blue-state coalition made the case that there is enough funding because Congress appropriated $6 billion set aside for the SNAP contingency fund to the USDA this year. The funds were available for allocation as of Oct. 1, according to the court document.

The coalition took issue with the USDA’s legal reasoning for why it can’t use the contingency fund. Because the appropriation for regular monthly benefits “no longer exists,” USDA said in a memo, the “contingency fund is not available to support FY 2026 regular benefits.”

The emergency funds are also not likely to be used to supplement SNAP because they’re typically reserved for unforeseen natural disasters, such as hurricanes. In such cases, emergency funds would be diverted toward the Disaster SNAP program. The lawsuit acknowledges a USDA statement on Hurricane Melissa, which could head north toward Florida this week after hitting Jamaica.

The White House’s Office of Management and Budget and its director, Russell Vought, are also listed as defendants due to their role in not apportioning additional funds from the contingency reserves.

Democrats are blaming the Trump administration for the SNAP funding lapse amid the government shutdown, which is now on its 28th day.

“Donald Trump is cutting off food assistance for nearly 900,000 Arizonans as we head into the month of Thanksgiving,” Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes said in a statement. “I’m suing to stop him and protect the seniors, veterans, working families and their children all across Arizona who rely on the few hundred dollars a month provided by SNAP to feed themselves.”

“USDA not only has authority to use contingency funds, it has a legal duty to spend all available dollars to fund SNAP benefits,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta concurred in a press release. “The Trump Administration, however, has chosen instead to play politics with this essential safety net that so many people depend on — including 5.5 million individuals in California alone.”

Each defendant is being accused of violating the Administrative Procedures Act for suspending SNAP benefits, which the plaintiffs said is contrary to law as well as arbitrary and capricious.

FOUR KEY FUNDING CLIFFS NEAR AS GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN CONTINUES WITH NO DEAL IN SIGHT

Beyond the Democratic attorneys general and governors, Congress is getting involved. Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-NM) introduced a bill, called the SNAP Back Act, on Tuesday to appropriate fiscal 2026 funds for SNAP and reimburse states for using their funds to cover the federally funded program in the event of a future government shutdown.

The measure is co-led by Stansbury, Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-NM), and Rep. Teresa Leger Fernandez (D-NM), all of whom are New Mexico Democrats.