Democrats have been asserting for weeks that the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has contingency funds ready to ensure that food stamp benefits continue beyond November 1 if the government remains unfunded. During a recent press appearance, Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the House Minority Leader, reiterated this claim: “They have the money,” he declared, stating that the administration is “choosing to withhold funding for SNAP because they want to punish hungry children, hungry veterans, hungry seniors, hungry women and hungry families as part of their continued effort to hurt everyday Americans.”

At a GOP news conference on Friday, however, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) joined USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins in forcefully rejecting Jeffries’ claim, calling it a false narrative. Rollins accused Democrats of mischaracterizing the department’s position, saying the notion that USDA can simply tap funds to maintain benefits is “a lie.”

Rollins explained that although USDA does maintain a contingency fund — about $5.3 billion, which Democrats have pointed to as the safety net — that amount is short of the roughly $9.2 billion estimated to cover November benefits. More importantly, she said, the contingency fund is only usable if Congress first approves the regular funding for the underlying food-assistance program. In other words, USDA cannot activate those reserves on its own while the government is shut down.

“We’ve twice notified state administrators in October that SNAP benefits will end November 1 if Congress fails to fund the government,” Rollins said. She placed the responsibility squarely on Congress rather than USDA, noting that appropriations bills for SNAP and related programs are stalled because the Senate has not passed the House’s continuing resolution—initially approved on September 19—to keep the government open through November 21 while negotiations continue.

Republicans say Democrats are refusing to reopen the government and that maintaining programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is within Congress’s constitutional role, not the USDA’s. Democrats, they say, have blocked reopening the government in the Senate 14 times, pressing instead for additional provisions, including expanded healthcare funding for undocumented immigrants and extension of enhanced subsidies under the Affordable Care Act.

Late Friday, the dispute took a new turn when two federal judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island ruled against USDA’s interpretation of the contingency fund. Indira Talwani and John McConnell (both appointed by President Barack Obama) ordered the agency to release the $5.3 billion reserve to help fund November SNAP benefits. McConnell explicitly noted that “there is no doubt that the contingency funds are appropriated funds that are necessary to carry out the program’s operation.” Talwani added that USDA “may supplement the Contingency Funds by authorizing a transfer of additional funds … to avoid any reductions.”

Despite the rulings, USDA cautioned that the practicalities of restarting payments for millions of families may cause delays, as state systems must make technical adjustments and logistics must be worked out. Payments, originally scheduled to begin November 1, could face interruption until compliance is fully executed. President Donald Trump weighed in, stating that Democrats simply need to acknowledge that “the government is open,” suggesting the process is straightforward if the political will exists.

In sum, the USDA contends that the party casting itself as the defender of SNAP recipients is misrepresenting the department’s flexibility. While funds exist in contingency, officials say they remain locked until Congress acts, meaning the fate of benefits is tied not to USDA’s coffers, but to the legislative process.