Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(168,798 posts)
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 03:31 PM 20 hrs ago

SNAP Recipients Fight Back In Junk Food Crackdown

Source: Newsweek

Published Mar 12, 2026 at 06:43 AM EDT updated Mar 12, 2026 at 08:35 AM EDT


Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients have filed a lawsuit against the federal government, arguing that new restrictions on what they can purchase with the benefits are unlawful and harmful to people who rely on the program.

Five plaintiffs sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in federal court in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, seeking to halt and then overturn SNAP "waivers" that block benefits being used to purchase foods considered low in nutritional value, such as candy and as sugary drinks. The USDA told Newsweek on Thursday it will "not comment on pending litigation."

Why It Matters

New food restrictions waivers have been approved in 22 states, with several already implementing the new blocks. The changes impact millions of low- and no-income Americans who depend on benefits to buy groceries.

The case challenges a policy shift backed by officials in the Trump administration that supporters say is intended to promote healthier diets. The plaintiffs argue the restrictions make it harder for families to access food and manage health conditions, while also creating confusion for shoppers at grocery store checkouts.

Read more: https://www.newsweek.com/snap-recipients-fight-back-junk-food-ban-waiver-lawsuit-11664497



Link to SUIT (PDF viewer) is here
73 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
SNAP Recipients Fight Back In Junk Food Crackdown (Original Post) BumRushDaShow 20 hrs ago OP
Sugar may not be the main problem bucolic_frolic 20 hrs ago #1
see post 15 niyad 18 hrs ago #20
Just give them the fucking money. They spend more money "discussing" it than it costs. twodogsbarking 20 hrs ago #2
It is, and always has been, about control, shaming, and, to a great degree, misogyny, niyad 18 hrs ago #11
That is what emotion Ai is for! jfz9580m 8 hrs ago #53
My sympathies would revolve around a better understanding of "access food", "manage health conditions" and...... FadedMullet 20 hrs ago #3
Do we get a say in what type of food the military is served? choie 20 hrs ago #5
These rules would prevent a family from using SNAP to buy a birthday cake for their kids. SunSeeker 19 hrs ago #9
see post 15 niyad 18 hrs ago #19
I don't know... Jacson6 20 hrs ago #4
See post 15 niyad 18 hrs ago #21
I'll pay attention to the counter-arguments when healthy food Torchlight 20 hrs ago #6
You nailed it "when healthy food is as affordable as many junk foods" quaint 19 hrs ago #7
THANK YOU!!! niyad 18 hrs ago #18
In what world would high-quality anything be as affordable as junk? Oliver Bolliver Butt 16 hrs ago #28
A sane one? niyad 14 hrs ago #38
define 'junk' then Oliver Bolliver Butt 14 hrs ago #42
Anything I don't like. niyad 14 hrs ago #43
In the same world that sealions move goalposts Torchlight 4 hrs ago #57
And when healthy food is available moonscape 14 hrs ago #35
EXACTLY. see post 15. niyad 14 hrs ago #39
Who says they have to buy healthy food? EX500rider 1 hr ago #63
You're arguing a point I neither made nor implied. Torchlight 1 hr ago #65
Maybe you could acquaint yourself with some of the restrictions, niyad 41 min ago #70
I'm not against junk food restrictions but I support an increase in the amount provided as eating healthy isn't cheap. cstanleytech 19 hrs ago #8
See post 15. niyad 18 hrs ago #17
Many poor people lack kitchens in which to whip up those great recipes from scratch with all their helpful vitamins. CTyankee 5 hrs ago #54
This doesn't stop them from buying TV dinners and macaroni and cheese and other easy quick Foods EX500rider 1 hr ago #64
Why do we get to be their food cop? CTyankee 1 hr ago #66
If the taxpayer is footing the bill the taxpayer has some say EX500rider 55 min ago #67
I agree. How can we get at this problem as a society? CTyankee 20 min ago #72
Yes which is why produce is a good area to provide more money to spend on as you don't need to cook salads. cstanleytech 55 min ago #68
A great point. The issue is how we get such foods to those who need, but can't afford to buy, those food items. CTyankee 17 min ago #73
"The five plaintiffs--who live in Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee and West Virginia..." BaronChocula 19 hrs ago #10
Really.?? What, exactly, are we to understand by that? niyad 18 hrs ago #12
With the exception of Colorado BaronChocula 18 hrs ago #13
Then why include Colorado? niyad 18 hrs ago #16
It was taken verbatim from the article BaronChocula 17 hrs ago #22
Thank you. niyad 17 hrs ago #23
... BaronChocula 17 hrs ago #24
Are people in those states less worthy of having food Bettie 16 hrs ago #26
The story they want to push with these restrictions, 70sEraVet 18 hrs ago #14
I think it's that taxpayer funded diabetes is a bad idea. pcdb 14 hrs ago #40
Do you seriously think ANY of this bs debate has to do with genuine concern niyad 14 hrs ago #44
Maybe not to Republicans pcdb 12 hrs ago #47
That isn't an either/or, regardless of how you frame it. Perhaps you niyad 12 hrs ago #49
Before I start screaming about the self-righteous sanctimony and niyad 18 hrs ago #15
But at what point is the line drawn? Polybius 14 hrs ago #37
Supplemental Nutrition. .last I checked, household items do not niyad 14 hrs ago #41
Starting April 1, Texas also will ban SNAP purchases of many drinks that use artificial sweeteners. Celerity 5 hrs ago #55
Totally agree with you IzzaNuDay 5 hrs ago #56
That's an entirely different issue though but it's one that does need to be addressed urgently IMO. cstanleytech 49 min ago #69
No, it is obviously a central part of the issue. niyad 39 min ago #71
If I remember correctly in NYS/C... electric_blue68 16 hrs ago #25
I remember exactly that decades ago when I got food stamps. NH Ethylene 16 hrs ago #27
In my case it was just for me... electric_blue68 15 hrs ago #29
I can't speak for NYS, but soda and candy was allowed in NYC when I was on it Polybius 14 hrs ago #36
I'm an NYC'r but don't have SNAP anymore... electric_blue68 14 hrs ago #45
I think I wrote this the other day. chouchou 15 hrs ago #30
Why should there be ANY "percentage for fun" designation? By WHOSE niyad 15 hrs ago #34
I understand your point. I was thinking that the "Other sons-a-####"" would stop trashing the poor.. chouchou 11 hrs ago #50
I can welll understand your desire to try that. However, as old and jaded niyad 9 hrs ago #52
Unfortunately, your words are true. I keep hoping that mostly people are kind, fair and just. chouchou 1 hr ago #58
It is good to have hope and optimism. niyad 1 hr ago #59
Absolutely. We can go shopping like professionals. chouchou 1 hr ago #60
yayyyy niyad 1 hr ago #61
You haven't been able to buy beer or wine for decades MichMan 15 hrs ago #31
see post 15 niyad 15 hrs ago #32
Creative use of Reductio ad absurdum. Very serious stuff Torchlight 1 hr ago #62
Let us add one little thing to this discussion. Apprroximately FIFTY PERCENT niyad 15 hrs ago #33
Not everyone has cooking facilities or equipment. Demobrat 14 hrs ago #46
THANK YOU!! And then there are the tuly homeless. I have never niyad 12 hrs ago #48
Where does it say "fresh food"? It says no "candy and sugary drinks" That would leave tons of options.. EX500rider 11 hrs ago #51

bucolic_frolic

(54,858 posts)
1. Sugar may not be the main problem
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 03:40 PM
20 hrs ago

There are dozens of other additives that amount to some altered form of sweetener ... polysaccharides, gums of many varieties, modified food starch to name a few. They alter gut bacteria. We weren't meant to eat this stuff.

twodogsbarking

(18,460 posts)
2. Just give them the fucking money. They spend more money "discussing" it than it costs.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 03:41 PM
20 hrs ago

Maybe it isn't even about the money.

niyad

(131,849 posts)
11. It is, and always has been, about control, shaming, and, to a great degree, misogyny,
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 05:25 PM
18 hrs ago

since it is assumed that women do most of the grocery shopping. And we KNOW women cannot make intelligent decisions on their own.

jfz9580m

(16,985 posts)
53. That is what emotion Ai is for!
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 03:25 AM
8 hrs ago

So someone like this nice Epstein associated lady (who was not raised religious, but swayed by pseudoscientific bilge like Intelligent Design) worked on:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Picard

She wanted to “rehabilitate” Epstein. She is a creepy person like all of the MIT Media Lab.

FadedMullet

(865 posts)
3. My sympathies would revolve around a better understanding of "access food", "manage health conditions" and......
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 03:43 PM
20 hrs ago

......"create confusion". Call me a reactionary, but there is nothing wrong with the public buying good food for the poor, instead of "All-American" junk food.

choie

(6,888 posts)
5. Do we get a say in what type of food the military is served?
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 04:15 PM
20 hrs ago

Why should we do so with SNAP? Or is it because snap benefits “the poors”?

SunSeeker

(58,189 posts)
9. These rules would prevent a family from using SNAP to buy a birthday cake for their kids.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 04:39 PM
19 hrs ago

I survived on food stamps as a kid, I know it was humiliating enough for my mom to pay with food stamps. To not even be able to buy your kid a birthday cake is just too much.



Jacson6

(1,936 posts)
4. I don't know...
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 04:13 PM
20 hrs ago

I receive a small stipend of SNAP each month as a retired OM that I use to buy chicken, hamburger and staple to last through the month. IME.

Torchlight

(6,735 posts)
6. I'll pay attention to the counter-arguments when healthy food
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 04:23 PM
20 hrs ago

is as affordable as many junk foods. Until then, they sound little more like sanctimonious attempts to tell others how to better live their lives than rational, thought-out positions. As long as luxury jets with bedrooms for officials are so common, I'll look at cutting costs there rather than scrutinizing the dining tables of people whose circumstances I don’t know.

EX500rider

(12,498 posts)
63. Who says they have to buy healthy food?
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 11:04 AM
1 hr ago

They're free to buy all kinds of macaroni and cheese etc and any kind of other processed crap they want, just not sugary drinks and candy

niyad

(131,849 posts)
70. Maybe you could acquaint yourself with some of the restrictions,
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 11:43 AM
41 min ago

and those that have been proposed over the years. Like the ones proposed in WI several yyears ago, forbidding real cheese (in WI), dried beans, rice, etc.

Disdain and sanctimonious judgement are just oozing from your posts on this subject.

See post 15.

cstanleytech

(28,428 posts)
8. I'm not against junk food restrictions but I support an increase in the amount provided as eating healthy isn't cheap.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 04:39 PM
19 hrs ago

I'd say an increase of an minimum of 200 a month per child for produce would probably help a lot.

CTyankee

(68,105 posts)
54. Many poor people lack kitchens in which to whip up those great recipes from scratch with all their helpful vitamins.
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 06:27 AM
5 hrs ago

Or maybe they hold down two jobs and simply can't be home to cook. Or they may simply be homeless.

EX500rider

(12,498 posts)
64. This doesn't stop them from buying TV dinners and macaroni and cheese and other easy quick Foods
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 11:05 AM
1 hr ago

Just not sugary drinks and candy

CTyankee

(68,105 posts)
66. Why do we get to be their food cop?
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 11:17 AM
1 hr ago

We don't "trust" them to buy the food WE deem OK to eat?

What can we do to help them eat better foods? Offer them fresh, better foods! Make it easy to get them.

EX500rider

(12,498 posts)
67. If the taxpayer is footing the bill the taxpayer has some say
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 11:29 AM
55 min ago

I think subsidizing diabetes may be a bad idea, ymmv

CTyankee

(68,105 posts)
72. I agree. How can we get at this problem as a society?
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 12:05 PM
20 min ago

Health care professionals are the people who can help here.

cstanleytech

(28,428 posts)
68. Yes which is why produce is a good area to provide more money to spend on as you don't need to cook salads.
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 11:29 AM
55 min ago

CTyankee

(68,105 posts)
73. A great point. The issue is how we get such foods to those who need, but can't afford to buy, those food items.
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 12:08 PM
17 min ago

Or maybe they simply don't have ready access to those foods.

BaronChocula

(4,461 posts)
10. "The five plaintiffs--who live in Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee and West Virginia..."
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 04:43 PM
19 hrs ago

I'll just put that there.

BaronChocula

(4,461 posts)
13. With the exception of Colorado
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 05:34 PM
18 hrs ago

these are "red states" going back at least three presidential elections. Simpleton magas would probably least expect this much pushback from ordinarily "safe zones."

Bettie

(19,600 posts)
26. Are people in those states less worthy of having food
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:05 PM
16 hrs ago

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. Just say it, whatever it is.

70sEraVet

(5,441 posts)
14. The story they want to push with these restrictions,
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 05:44 PM
18 hrs ago

is that poor people are undeserving. New restrictions, but an old tradition.

pcdb

(108 posts)
40. I think it's that taxpayer funded diabetes is a bad idea.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 09:47 PM
14 hrs ago

This is another issue that Democrats used to support but are now against. I guess we'll just keep driving the cost of healthcare up.

niyad

(131,849 posts)
44. Do you seriously think ANY of this bs debate has to do with genuine concern
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 10:15 PM
14 hrs ago

about people's health?

pcdb

(108 posts)
47. Maybe not to Republicans
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 11:52 PM
12 hrs ago

That doesn't mean Democrats have to want people to get diabetes just to be on the other side.

niyad

(131,849 posts)
49. That isn't an either/or, regardless of how you frame it. Perhaps you
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 12:16 AM
12 hrs ago

coul address some of the other, more immediate, issues being discussed in this thread?

niyad

(131,849 posts)
15. Before I start screaming about the self-righteous sanctimony and
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 05:48 PM
18 hrs ago

virtue signalling that seems to surround every discussion about "healthy eating" and "junk food restrictions", wherever they occur, I would like people to keep in mind one little fact. Many people live in the "food deserts", meaning there are no grocery stores within ten miles. The ONLY access to any kind of food in those areas is convenience stores, with their limited choices. And before I hear anything about "just get on a bus", as one pontificator snarled at me several years ago in a meeting, many of those same areas do not have decent public transit, either. And, even if there is, hauling bags of groceries on and off buses, particularly if one has to transfer, or has mobility isssues, is not a picnic.

When one defends all these restrictions, whatever one's stated reason, one must ask oneself why it is okay to tell these people what they may, or may not, purchase with OUR money. Does one tell the military how to spend the trillions they get? Does one restrict the oil companies? Big AG? Big Pharma? And then think about what those answers say about oneself.

Polybius

(21,820 posts)
37. But at what point is the line drawn?
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 09:41 PM
14 hrs ago

Should beer be allowed? How about household items? Or would those be the cutoff in your opinion? For the record, I am all for allowing sweets to be purchased with SNAP.

niyad

(131,849 posts)
41. Supplemental Nutrition. .last I checked, household items do not
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 09:52 PM
14 hrs ago

qualify as "nutrition". Allowing any kind of alcohol is, in all likelihood, never going to happen.

Celerity

(54,240 posts)
55. Starting April 1, Texas also will ban SNAP purchases of many drinks that use artificial sweeteners.
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 06:47 AM
5 hrs ago
Starting April 1, 2026, Texas will implement new restrictions on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, banning the purchase of candy, gum, and sweetened drinks containing 5g or more of added sugar or artificial sweeteners. These changes are part of a broader, state-driven effort to limit junk food in food-aid programs.

https://www.hhs.texas.gov/news/2026/03/new-snap-purchase-restrictions-take-effect-april-1

IzzaNuDay

(1,279 posts)
56. Totally agree with you
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 06:57 AM
5 hrs ago

Once I was on a business trip to an urban area, and I wanted to find some healthy snacks during my trip. I was fortunate to have a rental car. But even then, it was a challenge to find a grocery store in this area.

I found a small grocery store, but the produce quality was awful. And the first thing I thought was how do the residents ever find the same foods I look for? Yeah, we definitely have food deserts. And I am afraid it’s by design.

cstanleytech

(28,428 posts)
69. That's an entirely different issue though but it's one that does need to be addressed urgently IMO.
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 11:36 AM
49 min ago

electric_blue68

(26,764 posts)
25. If I remember correctly in NYS/C...
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 07:41 PM
16 hrs ago

when I had food stamps we couldn't buy soda, or candy. Not that I bought a lot anyway. Probably not chips, etc, either. Again, only bought a small to modest amount.

NH Ethylene

(31,326 posts)
27. I remember exactly that decades ago when I got food stamps.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:19 PM
16 hrs ago

I don't recall it being a problem for me. I certainly wasn't going to feed my two toddlers any junk food anyway.

Polybius

(21,820 posts)
36. I can't speak for NYS, but soda and candy was allowed in NYC when I was on it
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 09:39 PM
14 hrs ago

Early 2020's.

electric_blue68

(26,764 posts)
45. I'm an NYC'r but don't have SNAP anymore...
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 10:18 PM
14 hrs ago

but that's good. Nothing wrong with a bit of that

chouchou

(3,097 posts)
30. I think I wrote this the other day.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:29 PM
15 hrs ago

Wouldn't a percentage be more fair Like 15 percent or 20 percent for "fun"

It's amazing how many Americans stand up and rant about the poor get free food..."They should sweep the streets"
But..They don't mind when the politicians, Military, con people and corporations steal tons of money
from the taxpayers.. Grrrrr.

niyad

(131,849 posts)
34. Why should there be ANY "percentage for fun" designation? By WHOSE
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 09:07 PM
15 hrs ago

definition of "fun"???

I absolutely agree with the rest of your post.

chouchou

(3,097 posts)
50. I understand your point. I was thinking that the "Other sons-a-####"" would stop trashing the poor..
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 12:30 AM
11 hrs ago

....if there was a little bit of regular structure. My personal beliefs are; Give them the damn food/clothes cards..
and shut down the nasty overview. Yes, I'm trying to walk on both rails.

niyad

(131,849 posts)
52. I can welll understand your desire to try that. However, as old and jaded
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 03:08 AM
9 hrs ago

and annoyed and exhausted and ENRAGED as I am from many decades of dealing with those hate-filled assholes, I can tell you that NOTHING will stop them from trashing the poor, the immigrants, the disabled. .actually. . . anybody who isn't like them.

chouchou

(3,097 posts)
58. Unfortunately, your words are true. I keep hoping that mostly people are kind, fair and just.
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 10:43 AM
1 hr ago

...and I'm going to win a Rolls Royce today..

niyad

(131,849 posts)
59. It is good to have hope and optimism.
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 10:49 AM
1 hr ago

Can I have the first ride in your new Rolls?

MichMan

(17,076 posts)
31. You haven't been able to buy beer or wine for decades
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 08:32 PM
15 hrs ago

This is just an additional restriction it would appear.

niyad

(131,849 posts)
33. Let us add one little thing to this discussion. Apprroximately FIFTY PERCENT
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 09:05 PM
15 hrs ago

of ALL the food in this country goes to waste. FIFTY PERCENT. We could feed everyone. And yet the ones at the top playing their ugly games make sure that the ones at the bottom are debating, fighting over, piously virtue signalling over, scraps. How it must amuse them.

Demobrat

(10,281 posts)
46. Not everyone has cooking facilities or equipment.
Thu Mar 12, 2026, 10:23 PM
14 hrs ago

It’s all well and good to say the money should go for fresh food, but where is the single mom living with her two kids in a motel room supposed to cook it? How about the one living in a trailer without a working stove? And if there is a stove, what about the pots and pans? Does everyone pack them up when they run from an abusive relationship?
It’s so close minded to assume everyone has a burner and a pot to boil water for rice in. It’s just not the case.

niyad

(131,849 posts)
48. THANK YOU!! And then there are the tuly homeless. I have never
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 12:12 AM
12 hrs ago

understood the prohibition against hot or prepared foods in SNAP. WTAF??? Who could possibly need them more???

EX500rider

(12,498 posts)
51. Where does it say "fresh food"? It says no "candy and sugary drinks" That would leave tons of options..
Fri Mar 13, 2026, 12:31 AM
11 hrs ago

...that don't involve cooking

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»SNAP Recipients Fight Bac...