The federal government cannot prevent profits from the nation’s largest food assistance program from being used to buy candy, soda and other sugary drinks, the court has ruled.
Monday’s ruling overrides current or planned restrictions on the federally funded and state-run Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program in 23 states. President Donald Trump’s administration has not said whether it will appeal to the high court.
Amy Berman Jackson, a federal judge in Washington who was appointed to the bench by former President Barack Obama, said the ruling was not a comment on whether the restrictions were a good idea.
“Federal defendants and states may have a genuine desire to improve the health of SNAP households by encouraging healthy choices in their stores, and they can take lawful steps to achieve those goals,” she wrote. “But what they must not do is violate the law or their own regulations along the way.”
This restriction is part of the “Make America Healthy Again” campaign
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. encouraged states to limit what they can buy with food aid as part of their “Make America Healthy Again” campaign.
STAT Plus: Debate over soda and candy bans shows how MAHA is breaking old alliances
They reason that soda and candy are contributing to the prevalence of obesity, diabetes, and chronic disease, and that taking them off the menu would encourage healthier food choices.
The USDA has so far authorized 23 states to implement restrictions. Some have already been implemented, while others are expected to take effect in the coming months and years.
At least one state that had planned to limit soda and candy purchases reversed course earlier this year. The Colorado Human Services Commission voted against enacting the ban after SNAP beneficiaries and advocates said during a public hearing in March that they face stigma if they mistakenly try to use their benefits on prohibited items. They also said the rules were confusing because they would be allowed to buy drinks that contain at least 50% fruit or vegetable juice, but not drinks with less.
Although the goals are similar, the exact rules vary by state. Some wanted to ban both sugary drinks and candy, while others wanted to ban only sugary drinks.
SNAP beneficiaries in Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee and West Virginia have filed legal challenges to the candy and soda ban, which in some states also includes items such as sports drinks.
Judge says government ignored definition of food
STAT Plus: California Politicians Unexpected Campaign Against Ultra-Processed Foods
Jackson said the main legal error in limiting what can be purchased with SNAP benefits is because it violates Congress’ definition of “food.”
Under the law, SNAP benefits, formerly known as food stamps, can be used for “any food or food item for home consumption, except alcoholic beverages, tobacco, hot food, or hot food ready for consumption.”
The government can waive the requirement, but restricting access to nutrition benefits is not cited as a reason for doing so. But when states asked the USDA to authorize purchase limits, their requests included using a different definition of “food.”
These may not be the last words
The Department of Agriculture has not announced whether it plans to appeal the ruling.
The case is one of many challenges to the Trump administration’s policies and hinges on whether the administration has the authority to change them without Congressional approval.
SNAP is a massive program that helps about 39 million Americans (about 1 in 9 people) buy groceries, but it’s usually relatively invisible. Things have changed since Trump returned to office last year.
Under his massive tax and policy law signed into law last year, more recipients would be subject to work requirements, states would have to pay a larger share of administrative costs and could find themselves in a benefit cost crunch if error rates are too high.
During last year’s government shutdown, courts blocked the government from cutting off benefits. Meanwhile, Rollins said the program is rife with fraud.
— Jeff Mulvihill
