The Supreme Court grants the Trump administration crucial breathing room to resolve the government shutdown without being forced into wasteful spending by activist judges during budget negotiations.
Story Snapshot
- Supreme Court extends pause on federal judge’s order forcing full SNAP payments until Thursday night.
- The Trump administration successfully argues that the legal dispute could be resolved by a congressional funding bill.
- Justice Jackson stands alone in opposing the extension, showing liberal judicial activism.
- The House is expected to vote on Wednesday on the Senate bill that Trump has indicated he will sign.
Supreme Court Provides Strategic Window for Resolution
The Supreme Court on Tuesday extended until Thursday night a pause blocking a federal judge’s order that would have forced the Trump administration to pay full SNAP benefits during the government shutdown.
The two-day extension gives Congress time to pass a short-term funding bill that would reopen the government and properly fund the SNAP program serving 42 million Americans through constitutional processes rather than judicial overreach.
SNAP: Trump admin gets longer Supreme Court pause on order it pay full food stamp benefits https://t.co/ghmHHqI76M
— CNBC (@CNBC) November 11, 2025
Trump Administration’s Fiscally Responsible Approach
The administration had originally planned to pay 65% of SNAP benefits using available contingency funds totaling $4.6 billion, demonstrating responsible stewardship during the shutdown.
U.S. District Judge Jack McConnell rejected this measured approach, instead ordering officials to raid $4 billion from the Children’s Nutrition Program to fund full benefits.
This judicial mandate to shuffle funds between programs represents exactly the kind of government overreach that frustrates constitutional conservatives who believe spending decisions belong with elected representatives.
The Trump administration wisely argued to the Supreme Court that the legal dispute would become moot once Congress passes the funding bill. This strategic approach respects the separation of powers while ensuring programs receive proper funding through legislative channels rather than judicial decree.
Liberal Justice Stands Alone Against Common Sense
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson objected to the extension, demonstrating the predictable liberal judicial activism that seeks to bypass constitutional processes. Jackson indicated she would deny both the extension request and the underlying application, standing alone against her colleagues’ more measured approach.
Her position would have forced immediate compliance with the lower court’s order, regardless of imminent congressional action to resolve the funding issue properly.
Congressional Solution Moving Forward
The House of Representatives is expected to vote Wednesday afternoon on a Senate-approved bill that President Trump has indicated he will sign. This legislative solution represents the proper constitutional method for addressing government funding, rather than allowing federal judges to dictate spending priorities.
The Supreme Court’s extension recognizes this fundamental principle by allowing elected officials to resolve the matter through democratic processes rather than judicial compulsion.
New York Attorney General Letitia James predictably criticized the decision, claiming it leaves millions wondering how they will feed their families.
This rhetoric ignores that the Trump administration was already providing substantial benefits through available funds while working toward a complete solution through proper channels.
The temporary pause ensures sustainable, constitutionally sound funding rather than ad hoc judicial mandates that create dangerous precedents for future government operations.
