A federal judge has ruled that the U.S. government cannot prohibit the use of benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) for purchasing candy, soda, and other sugary drinks. The decision on Monday overturns restrictions that were in place or planned in 23 states.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson stated that while the goal of improving the health of SNAP households is valid, the method used violated federal law and the program's own regulations. The Agriculture Department, under the Trump administration's "Make America Healthy Again" campaign, had encouraged states to implement such limits, citing the role of sugary products in obesity and chronic diseases. At least one state, Colorado, had previously voted against a similar ban after SNAP beneficiaries raised concerns about stigma and confusion over the rules.
The legal challenge, filed by SNAP beneficiaries from several states including Colorado and West Virginia, centered on the definition of "food" as established by Congress. SNAP benefits are legally defined to cover "any food or food product for home consumption except alcoholic beverages, tobacco, hot foods or hot food products ready for immediate consumption." Jackson's ruling indicated that restricting purchases based on nutritional content, as proposed by the states, was not a permissible reason for waiving program requirements and that the requests used alternate definitions of food.
The Agriculture Department has not yet indicated whether it plans to appeal the ruling. This case is one of several challenges to policies implemented by the Trump administration that question the executive branch's authority to enact changes without congressional approval. SNAP, which assists nearly 39 million Americans, has seen increased scrutiny and policy changes under the current administration, including modifications to work requirements and administrative cost structures for states.