If taxpayers are footing the bill for the costs of food and healthcare for millions of Americans, the Trump administration believes that those receiving the benefits should at least be obliged to use their EBT cards to purchase healthier foods.
That’s why the White House has pushed for restrictions on SNAP benefits, specifically to exclude purchases of sugary sodas.
But leave it to a federal judge appointed by Barack Obama to gum up the works, as The Hill reported:
“Congress defined what ‘food’ is supposed to be, and it did not authorize the agency to amend or waive the definition it enacted. It did not authorize the agency to cut types of food out of SNAP entirely,” U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson wrote in a Monday filing, referencing the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).
“It set out clearly the type of experimental projects that could be tested to address the unquestionably serious health issues attributed to the rise of obesity in the population in general and particularly the low-income population,” she added.
ADVERTISEMENTAccording to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia filing, five states, including Iowa, Nebraska, West Virginia, Colorado and Tennessee, “submitted requests to the USDA to conduct pilot projects” between April and August 2025 attempting to “waive the federal definition of ‘food,’” removing certain items from that definition including soft drinks and soda.
Represented by the National Center for Law and Economic Justice (NCLEJ), a nonprofit focused on advancing justice for low-income families, five SNAP recipients from those five states had sued the USDA for implementing its waiver restriction pilot projects.
The decision sparked significant pushback on social media:
If these POS judges have nothing better to do then make sure unhealthy people still get what is making them unhealthy then this judge has no value. Remove her
— Johnny Appleseed (@badapple2026) June 23, 2026
I don't understand why the Trump admin keeps listening to these corrupt judges. They seem to have more power than the president himself. What a joke…
— Josef Bormann 🇺🇸 (@JosefBormann) June 23, 2026
Weird… it’s almost like they want poor people to stay poor, fat and die.
— bash (@mellamobash) June 23, 2026
KCRG also reported on the judge’s recent decision:
The Iowan named in the lawsuit, Marc Craig, said the state’s complicated restrictions prevent him from buying foods to help manage his kidney disease and diabetes. He said that he used to maintain his sodium and sugar levels with Pedialyte or Gatorade, but is no longer able to purchase those with his SNAP benefits.
The National Center for Law and Economic Justice said in a statement that “this decision makes clear that the USDA cannot bypass the legal guardrails that establish how SNAP must operate across the country. It affirms that families deserve a program that works without confusion.”
The USDA shared a statement to Reuters, saying “the idea that taxpayer funds should not be used to purchase junk food should not be controversial. USDA will not be backing down from the fight to Make America Healthy Again, including for families and communities reliant on SNAP.”
Oh, and if Jackson’s name rings a bell, that’s because she’s been a thorn in the side of the Trump administration since early in the president’s first term:
This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.
