1st Circuit denies USDA a stay pending appeal. Finds district court reasonably ordered USDA to issue full SNAP benefits in response to its violating his prior order and causing unnecessary hardship by failing to prepare for a predictable problem and wild changes of position.

Households that received benefits should spend them as usual. The Food and Nutrition Act requires USDA to operate SNAP under uniform national standards. It can only do so by telling the other states to issue full SNAP, ending this shameful episode. It admits it has the money./end

USDA ordered states to try to undo their actions, but it's too late. USDA regulations (and due process!) prohibit taking SNAP benefits out of households' accounts under these conditions. USDA is threatening the states that issued full SNAP, but they were following USDA's memo. 4/

USDA left it's Friday guidance in place for a day after the Supreme Court stayed the district court's order. More states assumed full November issuance was a "go". Then last night USDA issued a new memo telling states to stop and claiming that states issued full benefits wrongly

USDA's guidance said nothing about this being a tentative policy or it being subject to change if it obtained a stay of the district court's order. Many states reasonably took this as a green light and issued full November SNAP to their families. 2/

More heartless chaos in SNAP. A short 🧵. After a Rhode Island district court ruled that low-income households should receive full November SNAP benefits, many states began work to do so. Friday USDA issued guidance saying it was working toward full November SNAP issuances. 1/

This tells us nothing about the ultimate resolution of the Government's appeal. We will likely see a full opinion from the First Circuit in a day or two, after which the full Supreme Court will weigh in, probably quickly. That will tell the tale, for good or for bad. /end

The Administration appealed and sought a stay. The First Circuit Court of Appeals said it needed more time to write an opinion on the merits of the application for a stay. It didn't grant an interim stay while it wrote, but now Justice Jackson (acting alone) did.

With the Administration blocking the issuance of SNAP to 42 million people, the Rhode Island court issued one emergency order then another to release all benefits when USDA violated the first one. Because of the urgency, it didn't have time to write full opinions.

Important to understand what has and has not happened on SNAP this evening. Everything has been moving very quickly because USDA reversed its own position from September and tried to cut off SNAP completely at the last moment. It was sued (x3) and then kept changing positions.

My latest on the absurdly illegal SNAP shutdown the Administration is conducting. Their brief in the litigation was essentially just a collection of implausible policy arguments: the law is clear, as they themselves recognized as recently as last week. https://t.co/muzXDiG7Mm

I just updated my analysis of the Administration's abrupt reversal of its legal position to terminate SNAP benefits. A new post on USDA's website shows this is all politics. Balkinization: The Administration’s Shutdown of SNAP is Obviously Illegal-Updated

My latest on the Administration's outrageously illegal shutdown of SNAP. Their argument ignores the interpretation on their website just days ago and the first Trump Administration. Balkinization: The Administration’s Shutdown of SNAP is Obviously Illegal

7/ The pattern is clear: “When Russia has momentum, they don’t hit cities. When they’re getting destroyed at the front, they slam civilians.” So when you hear headlines of major attacks on Kyiv and Lviv, KNOW THAT THIS MEANS RUSSIA IS SLIPPING AT THE FRONT and buying time. ⤵️

My latest on the legality, or lack thereof, of the Administration's weekend firings of federal employees. This says nothing good about where the Rule of Law stands in this country today. Balkinization: The Legality of the Friday Night Massacre

My latest on why Senator Thune does not simply end the government shutdown by eliminating the filibuster. Balkinization: The Government Shutdown and the Filibuster

My latest on the government shutdown. Among other things, it turns out that reaching an agreement is harder if you (a) refuse to negotiate, and (b) broke your previous deal. Balkinization: Shutdown, You’d Better Take Care

Hard to see why Democrats should agree to avoid a shutdown if SCOTUS is going to give Trump the equivalent of a line-item veto, letting him pick and choose which congressionally authorized money he'll spend and which he won't.

And it questions whether mandamus is available here. If the Court bars remedies for illegal impoundments, it will effectively overrule Clinton v. NY, a 6-3 decision that Justice Thomas (and then-Chief Justice Rehnquist) joined. That would be a huge capitulation./End

That being said, it is disappointing. The justices take seriously two deeply unserious arguments. They think the Government may have an argument that the Impoundment Control Act precludes suits under appropriations acts. The conservative DC Circuit panel abandoned that position.