Judge Blocks Restrictions on Using SNAP Benefits for Soda and Candy
A U.S. District Judge ruled that the federal government cannot block Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits from being used to buy candy, soda, and other sugary drinks. Judge Amy Berman Jackson found that these restrictions violate Congress’s legal definition of “food,” scuttling policies currently in place or planned in 23 states.
The ruling affects the federally funded and state-run program that assists nearly 39 million Americans—approximately one in nine people—with grocery purchases. The Trump administration has not yet stated whether it will appeal the decision to a higher court.
Why did the judge block the sugary drink and candy bans?
Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruled that the restrictions ran contrary to the legal definition of “food” established by Congress. According to the law, SNAP benefits can be used for “any food or food product for home consumption,” with exceptions only for alcoholic beverages, tobacco, and hot foods ready for immediate consumption.
The court found that while the government can waive certain requirements, using the benefits to improve nutrition is not a listed reason to do so. Judge Jackson noted that while federal and state officials may have a “genuine desire to improve the health of SNAP households,” they cannot “violate the law and their own regulations along the way.”
How does this affect SNAP participants and states?
The ruling halts restrictions that were 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 purchases of soda and candy, arguing these items fuel epidemics of obesity, diabetes, and chronic disease.
The Agriculture Department had already granted permission to 23 states to implement these limits. In some cases, the rules varied; some states targeted only sugary beverages, while others included candy and sports drinks.
Some states had already pushed back. Colorado’s human services board voted against the ban after beneficiaries and advocates warned that the rules were confusing. Specifically, critics pointed out that the rules would have allowed drinks with at least 50% fruit or vegetable juice but banned those with less, potentially creating stigmas for users at checkout.
What could happen next with SNAP policies?
The Agriculture Department has not confirmed if it will challenge the ruling. This case is one of many legal battles concerning whether the Trump administration has the authority to change policies without approval from Congress.
The program faces other ongoing shifts. Under a tax and policy law signed last year, more recipients now face work requirements. Additionally, states must pay a larger share of administrative costs and may be liable for benefit costs if error rates are too high.
While the court has blocked the specific bans on sugary drinks and candy, other administration goals may persist. Agriculture Secretary Rollins has previously stated that “rampant fraud” exists within the program, and previous court actions have already been required to block the administration from cutting off benefits during a government shutdown last year.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the legal definition of “food” for SNAP benefits?
According to the law cited by Judge Jackson, it includes any food or food product for home consumption, excluding tobacco, alcoholic beverages, and hot foods ready for immediate consumption.
Which states were involved in the legal challenge?
The challenge was filed by SNAP beneficiaries in West Virginia, Tennessee, Nebraska, Iowa, and Colorado.
Why did the government want to ban soda and candy?
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. argued that these items contribute to chronic disease, diabetes, and obesity.
How should the government balance public health goals with the legal rights of benefit recipients?