����vlog

A coalition of 25 Democratic-run states sued the Trump administration Tuesday to prevent billions of dollars of cuts to federal food assistance that are set to kick in this weekend.Democratic attorneys general and governors from 25 states and Washington, D.C., claimed in the lawsuit that the Trump administration was threatening "illegal" cuts to SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps.The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the program for 42 million Americans, "cannot simply suspend all benefits indefinitely, while refusing to spend funds from available appropriations for SNAP benefits for eligible households," the lawsuit claims.The Trump administration has argued it does not have the power to use that pot of existing money — known as its contingency fund — to cover the SNAP program beyond Saturday, because of the federal government shutdown."The contingency fund is not available to support FY 2026 regular benefits, because the appropriation for regular benefits no longer exists," officials in the Department of Agriculture wrote in a memo last week.The risk of tens of millions of Americans losing food aid has triggered intense anxiety across Washington, as the government shutdown nears the one-month mark.Top lawmakers from both parties acknowledge it would be the most significant impact of the shutdown to date, with House Speaker Mike Johnson privately warning his GOP members on a call Tuesday that the pain was about to spike for everyday Americans.Senate Democrats have now voted 13 times to block a GOP funding bill because it does not include their separate demands on extending health care subsidies. But GOP leaders have refused to negotiate on the subsidies until the government reopens, leaving both parties in a bitter stalemate with no clear way out.Democrats have been unflinching in their stance, despite the looming Saturday deadline for the food aid. They argue that President Donald Trump has sought to "weaponize" the food assistance program, intentionally choosing not to fund the aid to pressure Democrats to yield.Fight over food aidShortly after the lawsuit was filed Tuesday, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins told CNN that there isn't enough contingency funding to cover SNAP benefits for November, which she said would cost about $9.2 billion."As of today, that $9.2 billion, we don't even have close to that in contingency funding," Rollins said. "We've got to get this government open."She added that "all it takes is a yes on a continuing resolution to keep the government going, and to send that (SNAP) money out to the states."A so-called clean continuing resolution would extend government funding at current levels. But congressional Democrats have opposed that because Republicans haven't agreed to negotiate on the expiring health care subsidies.The White House referred CNN to the Office of Management and Budget for comment on the lawsuit. An OMB spokesperson said in a statement that "Democrats chose to shut down the government knowing full well that SNAP would soon run out of funds. It doesn't have to be this way, and it's sad they are using the families who rely on it as pawns."Democratic attorney general: 'This is wrong'The Democratic-run states filed the lawsuit in Massachusetts federal court. Court records indicate the case was randomly assigned to District Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama appointee who was confirmed in a bipartisan and unanimous Senate vote in 2014.Congress approved $6 billion for a "SNAP-specific contingency fund" in the spending bill that averted a shutdown in March, the lawsuit notes. The lawsuit also points out that, as recently as September, the USDA website identified these funds as part of its plan to keep the food stamp payments flowing in case of a government shutdown.North Carolina Attorney General Jeff Jackson, a Democrat, accused the Trump administration of using SNAP benefits "to play shutdown politics" at a news conference Tuesday announcing his support for the lawsuit."The truth is the department has the money," Jackson said, adding, "They are looking to ratchet up the pain in an already painful moment. This is wrong, and it's against the law."