Down to $1.18: How Families Are Coping With SNAP Cuts; The New York Times, November 7, 2025

Eric Adelson, Mary Beth Gahan, Sean Keenan, Lourdes Medrano, Christina MoralesSonia A. Rao, Dan Simmons and Kevin Williams, The New York Times; Down to $1.18: How Families Are Coping With SNAP Cuts

"In New Jersey, a single mother struggled to figure out how to feed her two young sons with $50.

In Oklahoma, a 61-year-old woman questioned whether driving to a food pantry was worth the gas money.

And in Colorado, a woman grabbed food from a Walmart dumpster.

For the 42 million people who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, the country’s largest anti-hunger program, it has been a chaotic, nerve-racking week.

Because of the government shutdown, the Trump administration initially sought to stop supplying benefits. Lawsuits and court rulings and a Trump appeals created further confusion. By Friday, the Supreme Court paused an order from a federal judge that would have required the White House to fully fund the program.

For many recipients, the legal battle meant one thing: a search for sustenance.

The New York Times asked dozens of SNAP recipients over the past week how they were coping. In interviews, they talked about the confusion and anxiety, as well as the hard choices. Here are some of their stories."

Supreme Court temporarily blocks full SNAP benefits even as they'd started to go out; Indiana Public Media, NPR, November 7, 2025

Jennifer Ludden , Indiana Public Media, NPR; Supreme Court temporarily blocks full SNAP benefits even as they'd started to go out

"The U.S. Supreme Court temporarily granted the Trump administration's request to block full SNAP food benefits during the government shutdown, even as residents in some states had already begun receiving them.

The Trump administration is appealing a court order to fully restart the country's largest anti-hunger program. The high court decision late Friday gives a lower court time to consider a more lasting pause.

The move may add to confusion, though, since the government said it was sending states money on Friday to fully fund SNAP at the same time it appealed the order to pay for them.

Shortly after U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr. issued that decision Thursday afternoon, states started to announce they'd be issuing full SNAP benefits. Some people woke up Friday with the money already on the debit-like EBT cards they use to buy groceries. The number of states kept growing, and included California, Oregon, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Connecticut among others.

The Supreme Court's decision means states must, for now, revert back to the partial payments the Trump administration had earlier instructed them to distribute. While the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit rejected the administration's request for an administrative stay, the appeals court said it would consider the request for the stay and intends to issue a decision as quickly as possible.

Funding for the nation's largest anti-hunger program ran out a week ago, as the federal shutdown entered its second month. States, cities and food banks have been ramping up donations desperately trying to fill the gap. Nearly 42 million people rely on SNAP, most of them extremely low-income families with children, along with seniors, or people with disabilities.

In his order, Judge McConnell admonished the government for deciding earlier in the week to make only partial SNAP payments. He said officials failed to consider the "needless suffering" that would cause millions of people who rely on that aid. He also suggested they had delayed the partial payments for "political reasons.""