States Say Rule Was Rushed, Illegal, and Destined to Sow Chaos
In a complaint filed in Oregon federal court, the states contend the USDA failed to justify why it excluded certain immigrants while allowing others to remain eligible. They also argue the agency broke its own rules by forcing states to implement the policy just one day after issuing the memo—rather than the traditional 120-day grace period intended to prevent mass errors.
“In issuing the guidance, USDA has placed states in an untenable position,” the attorneys general wrote, warning the “overly narrow” rules will erode trust, spark costly litigation, and chill participation among immigrant communities.
The plaintiffs—spanning New York to Hawaii, Illinois to New Mexico—ask the court to declare the memo unlawful and void.
Tens of Thousands Could Lose Food Aid
The states warn the rule could cut off tens of thousands of lawful permanent residents who rely on SNAP to feed their families.
Washington Attorney General Nick Brown condemned the change:
“Now, without any warning or legal basis, USDA is trying to rip these benefits away from green card holders in our communities.”
The challenge also highlights severe financial implications. States face “massive” penalties for SNAP payment errors under newly tightened federal rules. New York, which spends $400 million annually to run its program, could owe an additional $367.5 million if its error rate exceeds 6%—and nearly $1.2 billion if it passes 10%.
Under USDA regulations, a 120-day exclusion period shields states from penalties while adjustments are made. The lawsuit says the agency’s one-day implementation requirement obliterated that protection.
