- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Federal judge rules government can't prevent using SNAP to purchase energy drinks and soda
Posted on 6/26/26 at 4:25 pm
Posted on 6/26/26 at 4:25 pm
quote:
The federal government can’t block benefits from the nation’s largest food aid program from being used to buy candy, soda and other sugary drinks, a judge ruled.
Monday’s ruling scuttles restrictions now in place or planned for the federally funded and state-run Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program in 23 states. President Donald Trump’s administration has not said whether it will appeal to a higher court.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who sits in Washington and was nominated to the bench by former President Barack Obama, said in her opinion that the ruling was because the federal government did not follow its own definition of “food.” She said it wasn’t a comment on whether the restrictions are a good idea.
“The federal defendants and the states may have a genuine desire to improve the health of SNAP households by encouraging healthy choices at the store, and they can take lawful steps to meet those goals,” she wrote. “But what they cannot do is violate the law and their own regulations along the way.”
https://apnews.com/article/snap-food-aid-candy-soda-sugary-drink-effc74d2c5013bcd7e17ce43f176bdee
quote:
Jackson said the main legal misstep in restricting what SNAP benefits could buy came because it ran contrary to Congress’s definition of “food.”
Under the law, SNAP benefits — formerly known as food stamps — can be used for “any food or food product for home consumption except alcoholic beverages, tobacco, hot foods or hot food products ready for immediate consumption.”
The government can waive requirements, but limiting use of the benefits to improve nutrition isn’t listed as a reason to do so. Yet when states asked the Agriculture Department to let them restrict purchases, their requests included using alternate definitions of “food.”
Posted on 6/26/26 at 4:27 pm to Shexter
Can’t get hot food but you CAN get Oreos and Pepsi…. Make it make sense.
Posted on 6/26/26 at 4:30 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
Can’t get hot food but you CAN get Oreos and Pepsi…. Make it make sense.
It's somewhat comical
quote:
Federal SNAP rules (dating back to the 1970s) prohibit buying hot prepared foods meant for immediate consumption, such as rotisserie chickens, hot deli soups, or hot sandwiches. The program is legally designed to help households buy groceries and staple ingredients to prepare meals at home.
quote:
The Temperature Loophole: You can buy cold, pre-cooked items (like a cold rotisserie chicken or a cold deli sandwich) with your EBT card. However, if the store heats that exact same food up, it becomes ineligible.
Posted on 6/26/26 at 4:33 pm to SallysHuman
Really, I don’t think that SNAP should exist at all. But hot food is explicitly excluded from SNAP coverage under the statute, while junk food is not.
Posted on 6/26/26 at 4:34 pm to Shexter
So, if these politicians really care about the issue they can simply go against big donors and classify things with scant nutritional benefits as non-food. Win win.
Posted on 6/26/26 at 4:36 pm to Shexter
We should be able to vote on what SNAP benefit recipients should be able to buy since they’re buying it with our money
If they don’t agree, they can pay out of pocket. They ain’t starving anyway
If they don’t agree, they can pay out of pocket. They ain’t starving anyway
Posted on 6/26/26 at 4:37 pm to UFFan
quote:
But hot food is explicitly excluded from SNAP coverage under the statute, while junk food is not.
It’s because of ridiculous and outdated rules… a hot rotisserie chicken is a far better meal item than a sack of cookies and a bucket of cola.
Posted on 6/26/26 at 4:42 pm to Shexter
I mean if they want to waste their benefits on junk I say let them. :idk:
Posted on 6/26/26 at 4:43 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
It’s because of ridiculous and outdated rules…
Yes, originally designed to promote cooking a family meal with fresh ingredients at home.
quote:
classify things with scant nutritional benefits as non-food.
Some states had put requirements for the energy drinks to have a certain percentage of natural ingredients. Probably why so many varieties of energy drinks suddenly appeared on the market.
Currently under the Louisiana SNAP Healthy Foods Waiver, all energy drinks containing stimulants (like caffeine, guarana, or taurine) are strictly banned from purchase with SNAP EBT, regardless of their ingredient makeup.
Posted on 6/26/26 at 4:48 pm to bigberg2000
No, bc then you’ll pay more on the arse end in all the “free” medical care they’ll receive for all the health issues this food causes!!!!
Posted on 6/26/26 at 5:10 pm to Shexter
Lief's hard - - - let me people have a Coke
Posted on 6/26/26 at 5:19 pm to Shexter
Like most court decisions, yall are commenting on the policy and not the law.
This was a statutory construction ruling - and probably the correct one. This is independent of the wisdom of the statute itself.
This thread proves once again that everyone hates “activist judges” until they want one.
This was a statutory construction ruling - and probably the correct one. This is independent of the wisdom of the statute itself.
This thread proves once again that everyone hates “activist judges” until they want one.
Posted on 6/26/26 at 5:27 pm to Shexter
quote:
Amy Berman Jackson
I know this name. Didn't she have some other really kooky ruling recently?
Posted on 6/26/26 at 5:29 pm to deeprig9
Google- she's the bitch that sent Paul Manafort and Roger Stone to prison because they are Republicans and she's a commie.
Posted on 6/26/26 at 5:30 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
Can’t get hot food
If you start allowing hot food you will eventually have to make all sit down restaurants accept it. Only limiting it to grocery or convenience stores will quickly be deemed racist since black people live in "food deserts". Only limiting it to certain areas allowing sit down restaurants to accept based on the demographics of that area is..you know...the thing.
Posted on 6/26/26 at 5:33 pm to junkfunky
quote:
If you start allowing hot food you will eventually have to make all sit down restaurants accept it.
I didn't think about that..
Soda and snack machines take cards now- do they take ebt cards? Maybe there's a way to carve out "store" hot food vs restaurant hot food? But, yeah, you bring up a good point!
Posted on 6/26/26 at 5:34 pm to facher08
quote:do they? I thought most soft drinks used high fructose corn syrup.
Sugar lobby wins again.
Posted on 6/26/26 at 5:34 pm to Shexter
I havent been keeping up with this... main question is why not rewrite the law of what constitutes food?
It does seem pretty obvious that the definition needs to change.
Of course Dems will likely vote against anything that upsets their people, which ae likely most of the EBT users.
It does seem pretty obvious that the definition needs to change.
Of course Dems will likely vote against anything that upsets their people, which ae likely most of the EBT users.
Back to top

16








