A federal judge in Oregon has blocked the USDA from enforcing a Nov. 1 deadline for states to apply new immigration-related SNAP eligibility rules, extending the 120-day grace period to April 9. Judge Mustafa Kasubhai found Oct. 31 USDA guidance created confusion that impeded states' ability to comply and that enforcing the earlier deadline would cause irreparable harm to state budgets. The order follows a lawsuit by 21 states and the District of Columbia alleging the guidance wrongly excluded some permanent residents, asylees and refugees.
Judge Blocks USDA From Enforcing Nov. 1 SNAP Deadline, Extends Grace Period to April 9
FILE PHOTO: A man holds a sign reading "SNAP Feeds Families," as food aid benefits come under threat due to the ongoing U.S. government shutdown, during "A Rally for SNAP" on the steps of the Massachusetts Statehouse in Boston, Massachusetts, U.S., October 28, 2025. REUTERS/Brian Snyder/File Photo
A federal judge has ordered the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to give states more time to implement new immigration-related restrictions on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, preventing the agency from enforcing a Nov. 1 compliance deadline that could have exposed states to severe budgetary penalties.
Court Order and Rationale
U.S. District Judge Mustafa Kasubhai in Eugene, Oregon — appointed by President Joe Biden — granted an injunction at the request of a coalition of Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia. The order requires the USDA to extend the expiration of a 120-day grace period for implementing the changes from November 1 to April 9.
Kasubhai found that USDA guidance issued on Oct. 31 about who qualifies for SNAP "created confusion" and impeded states' ability to comply within the original timeframe. He concluded that enforcing USDA's stated deadline would be unlawful, inconsistent with past practice and would cause irreparable harm to state budgets.
"The inability to provide compliance in the time period in which they were forced to by virtue of the guidance contributed to an erosion of trust," Kasubhai said.
Dispute Over Guidance and Eligibility
The dispute stems from new language in federal legislation included in President Donald Trump's tax and domestic policy package that restricts SNAP eligibility to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents (green card holders). Attorneys general from 21 states and the District of Columbia sued last month, arguing that the USDA's Oct. 31 guidance improperly treated certain lawful permanent residents — including some who were initially granted asylum or admitted as refugees — as ineligible for benefits.
The USDA has said it did not intend its guidance to exceed the statutory immigration-related restrictions. A Justice Department attorney told the court the states' interpretation reflected a "misunderstanding." The agency issued a revised guidance last week; Kasubhai said that revision corrected what had functioned, in practice, as an overly broad ineligibility policy that conflicted with the governing statute (referred to in court filings as the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act").
What Remains In Dispute
Although the revised guidance addressed some concerns, USDA maintained that the 120-day grace period expired on Nov. 1 — effectively the day after the initial guidance — a position the judge rejected at the end of a nearly four-hour hearing. The states, which administer SNAP benefits day to day, argued they needed more time to implement changes without risking sudden fiscal penalties or disruptions to benefit administration.
The injunction gives states until April 9 to come into compliance with the statute's requirements as interpreted by the court, while litigation over the underlying legal questions continues.
(Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Bill Berkrot.)
