The battle over SNAP benefits might be being waged from state to state, but federal courts are part of the action, too.
Two states that had planned restrictions on the foods that can be purchased by those using Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program cards have put the moves on hold after a federal court ruled in favor of SNAP recipients in a case covering five other states, Newsweek reported Monday.
Six states still have restrictions in place.
SNAP, formerly known as “food stamps,” is a federally funded program administered by the individual states. It is overseen by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Some states restrict its use from purchasing junk food, such as sodas, candy, and some juices and energy drinks. Others have plans to do so.
The states that already have restrictions that are unaffected by the ruling, according to the grocery tracking website Greenchoice, are Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas, and Utah.
South Carolina and North Dakota were only days away from implementing similar bans beginning Sept. 1 when Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointee on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, struck down restrictions that had already been in place in Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee, and West Virginia.
The USDA had approved South Carolina and North Dakota’s plans in December, according to Newsweek.
BREAKING: Obama-appointed U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson just BLOCKED the Trump admin from restricting SNAP benefits use for soda and candy pic.twitter.com/gDkGoxxFqw
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) June 23, 2026
In her ruling, Jackson — who presided over the trials of Trump supporters Paul Manafort and Roger Stone — declared that Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins had misapplied federal statute in approving the restrictions for those states, according to Politico.
The future of SNAP restrictions will likely hinge on whether the Trump administration appeals Jackson’s ruling, U.S. News and World Report noted.
The administration has not made an announcement yet, but both Rollins and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. issued statements in the wake of Jackson’s decision that implied they would contest the ruling.
Branding Jackson as an “activist judge,” Rollins used a post on the social media platform X to explain the USDA’s position.
An activist judge just blocked our commonsense restriction on using SNAP benefits for soda and junk.
SNAP is for food — not sugar bombs fueling obesity, diabetes, and skyrocketing healthcare costs for low-income families.
Taxpayers shouldn’t subsidize junk food and drinks at…
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) June 23, 2026
“SNAP is for food — not sugar bombs fueling obesity, diabetes, and skyrocketing healthcare costs for low-income families,” she wrote.
“Taxpayers shouldn’t subsidize junk food and drinks at the expense of American health.”
“We will continue pursuing every available path to Make America Healthy Again.”
In her seat on the District Court for the District of Columbia, Jackson presided over the trials of some of those arrested in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol incursion.
She also presided over the trials of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and outspoken Trump supporter Roger Stone, who both faced federal charges arising from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Trump’s alleged “Russian collusion.” (Mueller’s own investigation could find no evidence of such collusion.)
Berman Jackson sentenced both men to stiff prison terms.
Trump commuted Stone’s sentence in July 2020. Trump pardoned Manafort in December 2020.
In a post responding to Rollins, Kennedy was just as forceful about Berman Jackson’s decision in the SNAP case.
Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for products that make people sick and then pay again for the medical care that follows. SNAP was created to fight hunger and improve nutrition, not to subsidize the chronic disease epidemic. Today’s ruling does not change the facts about the… https://t.co/gcmAwtck0E
— Secretary Kennedy (@SecKennedy) June 23, 2026
“Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for products that make people sick and then pay again for the medical care that follows. SNAP was created to fight hunger and improve nutrition, not to subsidize the chronic disease epidemic,” he wrote.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.
Ad block users: Some site features may not work correctly while an ad blocker is enabled, because they break scripts and content this website depends on. If you can’t see comments below, for example, please disable your ad blocker.
Read the full article here