States file lawsuit against Trump administration over efforts to collect SNAP recipients' data
The data demand comes as the Trump administration has sought to collect private information on mostly lower-income people who may be in the country illegally. It has already ordered the Internal Revenue Service and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to share private information with the Department of Homeland Security to aid in deportation efforts.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture told states last week that it had until Wednesday to hand over the data for those enrolled in its Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which serves more than 42 million people nationwide. The USDA said the data will help it combat waste, fraud and abuse.
The states' lawsuit seeks an injunction to block the data transfer. In the meantime, state attorneys general in the SNAP lawsuit said they will not disclose what they consider to be private information of recipients — including their immigration status, birthdates and home addresses — because they believe it would be a violation of privacy laws.
'It's a bait-and-switch of the worst kind,' California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a Monday afternoon news conference announcing the lawsuit. 'SNAP recipients provided this information to get help feeding their families, not to be entered into a government surveillance database or be used as targets in the president's inhumane immigration agenda.'
In May, the department announced it was seeking the data as part of President Donald Trump's executive order to obtain data from state programs to help root out fraud and waste. 'For years, this program has been on autopilot, with no USDA insight into real-time data,' USDA Secretary Brooke L. Rollins said in a statement at the time. 'The Department is focused on appropriate and lawful participation in SNAP, and today's request is one of many steps to ensure SNAP is preserved for only those eligible.'
USDA officials declined a request for comment on the suit.
The USDA did not mention immigration enforcement in the announcement or later notices. It is not clear why USDA officials believe the data will help it weed out fraud and abuse. The agency claims the program is already 'one of the most rigorous quality control systems in the federal government.'
Immigration advocates noted that the Trump administration has used the same argument to obtain other sensitive data, only to later admit it would be using the information to enhance its deportation operations. Trump administration officials, for example, initially claimed they were seeking state Medicaid data to fight fraud. Last week, a top immigration official conceded they would be utilizing that same information to locate immigrants.
Agency officials have threatened to withhold SNAP funding if states fail to comply with their demand for data.
While immigrants without legal status are ineligible to receive SNAP benefits, they can apply on behalf of their children who are U.S. citizens or those who are part of a mixed-status household.
Under the program, formerly known as food stamps, the federal government pays for 100% of the food benefits, but the states help cover the administrative costs. States are also responsible for determining whether individuals are eligible for benefits and for issuing those benefits to enrollees.
Immigration and data privacy advocates expressed alarm at the Trump administration's efforts to obtain sensitive SNAP data maintained by states.
'The administration has all but told us that their intention is to comb this data and use it for unlawful purposes that include immigration enforcement,' said Madeline Wiseman, an attorney with the National Student Legal Defense Network, which filed a lawsuit in May with privacy and hunger relief groups that are also challenging USDA's efforts for SNAP data.
—-
Contact the AP's global investigative team at Investigative@ap.org or https://www.ap.org/tips/.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate heads home with no deal to speed confirmations as irate Trump tells Schumer to 'go to hell'
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate is leaving Washington Saturday night for its monthlong August recess without a deal to advance dozens of President Donald Trump's nominees, calling it quits after days of contentious bipartisan negotiations and Donald Trump posting on social media that Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer can 'GO TO HELL!' Without a deal in hand, Republicans say they may try to change Senate rules when they return in September to speed up the pace of confirmations. Trump has been pressuring senators to move quickly as Democrats blocked more nominees than usual this year, denying any fast unanimous consent votes and forcing roll calls on each one, a lengthy process that can take several days per nominee. 'I think they're desperately in need of change," Senate Majority Leader John Thune said of Senate rules Saturday after negotiations with Chuck Schumer and Trump broke down. "I think that the last six months have demonstrated that this process, nominations is broken. And so I expect there will be some good robust conversations about that.' The latest standoff comes as Democrats and Republicans have gradually escalated their obstruction of the other party's executive branch and judicial nominees over the last two decades, and as Senate leaders have incrementally changed Senate rules to speed up confirmations — and make them less bipartisan. In 2013, Democrats changed Senate rules for lower court judicial nominees to remove the 60-vote threshold for confirmations as Republicans blocked President Barack Obama's judicial picks. In 2017, Republicans did the same for Supreme Court nominees as Democrats tried to block Trump's nomination of Justice Neil Gorsuch. Trump has been pressuring Senate Republicans for weeks to cancel the August recess and grind through dozens of his nominations as Democrats have slowed the process. But Republicans hoped to make a deal with Democrats instead, and came close several times over the last few days as the two parties and the White House negotiated over moving a large tranche of nominees in exchange for reversing some of the Trump administration's spending cuts on foreign aid, among other issues. But it was clear that there would be no agreement when Trump attacked Schumer on social media Saturday evening and told them to pack it up and go home. 'Tell Schumer, who is under tremendous political pressure from within his own party, the Radical Left Lunatics, to GO TO HELL!' Trump posted on Truth Social. 'Do not accept the offer, go home and explain to your constituents what bad people the Democrats are, and what a great job the Republicans are doing, and have done, for our Country.' Thune said afterward that there were 'several different times' when the two sides thought they had a deal, but in the end 'we didn't close it out.' It's the first time in recent history that the minority party hasn't allowed at least some quick confirmations. Thune has already kept the Senate in session for more days, and with longer hours, this year to try and confirm as many of Trump's nominees as possible. But Democrats had little desire to give in without the spending cut reversals or some other incentive, even though they too were eager to skip town after several long months of work and bitter partisan fights over legislation. 'We have never seen nominees as flawed, as compromised, as unqualified as we have right now,' Schumer said Saturday.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Our View: Republicans, Democrats scheming on mid-term elections
Two wrongs don't make a right. It's wrong that at the urging of President Trump, Texas Republicans are scheming to redrawn political boundaries to dilute the power of minorities and Democratic voters in next year's mid-term elections. It's wrong that California Democrats, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom, now are scheming to usurp the will of California voters and reshape the state's political boundaries to block Texas Republicans from gaming the congressional elections. For many, this may seem like boring insider political baseball. But the scheming shows how politicians care less about the people they represent at home and more about retaining the power of their political parties — Republican and Democratic — in Washington. The scheming we now see is a shameful corruption of democracy and the electoral system politicians claim they support. At its heart is control of the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives has 435 members — each representing about the same number of constituents. Every 10 years, after completion of a U.S. Census, allocation of a state's share of House seats is decided and the political boundary lines of congressional districts within the states are adjusted. In most states, such as Texas, state politicians and their donor buddies scheme on adjusting district boundary lines to protect incumbents and assure a political party's election. That's called gerrymandering. Texas Republicans are not waiting for the next 10-year census to redraw district lines. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has called the Republican-dominated Legislature back into a special session to consider a new political map that shifts district lines and is designed to elect more Republicans to Congress. If all goes as the schemers hope, Texas Republicans could pick up five additional seats in next year's mid-term elections. That would be a big deal in the House, where Republicans now hold a slim majority. Democratic takeover of the House would apply the brakes on Trump's controversial agenda. And that's where California Gov. Newsom comes in. He's scheming on a plan to fight fire with fire. Redraw California's political boundary lines before next year's mid-term elections to advantage Democratic candidates. That could shrink California's nine-member Republican delegation to three or four. But there is a catch. In 2010, California voters, who were fed up with self-dealing politicians, overwhelmingly passed a ballot measure that created a bipartisan independent redistricting commission. No longer could the state's politicians draw their own district lines. In 2011 and 2021, the commission drew district lines, with a focus on creating competitive districts, within coherent geographic areas, containing voters with shared interests, and providing representations for minority communities. Both Democratic and Republican parties, refusing to quietly give up their power, strongly opposed creation of a bipartisan independent commission in 2010. To accomplish his mid-term scheme, Newsom would have to quickly call a statewide special election — at a cost of what some estimate to be $200 million — and ask voters to return redistricting power to self-serving politicians. Fat chance voters would go along with that. As an alternative, Newsom and his co-conspirators are considering crawling through an imaginary loophole in the law that created the bipartisan independent redistricting commission. They reason that since the law voters created only called for an independent commission to set political district lines after a U.S. Census every 10 years, the Legislature is free to undo the commission's work in the years between — drawing legislators' own self-serving lines. Good luck with that. Let the lawsuits begin! Warning: This threatened gerrymandering war — which could expand to other states — may blow up in both Democratic and Republican party faces. Voters are not as dumb as politicians think they are. They can spot election cheating when they see it. Like it or not, the balance of power in Washington should be decided by voters at the ballot box, not schemers in the backroom. If we believe in the electoral system that is the foundation of our democracy, we must trust voters. California's legislators will return to Sacramento after a summer break in a couple of weeks. Hopefully Democrats then also will return to their good senses.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Dishman party change creates Republican majority on Muncie City Council
MUNCIE, IN — Jerry Dishman, in his fifth term representing District 5 on Muncie City Council, has announced he is leaving the local Democratic Party and becoming a Republican. Dishman's party change — announced on Saturday, Aug. 2 — gives Republicans a 5-4 majority on the council. Dishman — the longest-serving member on the current council — became the second council Democrat in recent weeks to change his party affiliation. In June, council member Brandon Garrett also announced he was becoming a Republican. In a statement released on Saturday, Dishman said he "did a lot of soul searching and also spent multiple hours speaking with many trusted and valued friends from both sides of the aisle" before making his decision to change parties. Dishman, first elected to the council in 2005, said most of those he spoke to "merely confirmed what I already knew to be the right move." "I have been a moderate Democrat my entire life," he said. "However, the local Democrat Party has gone, in my opinion, to the far left and no longer aligns with my values and beliefs." Dishman became the third local public official to change parties since Andrew Dale was elected Democratic Party chairman in March. In April, Eric Hoffman elected Delaware County prosecutor as a Democrat in 2018 and 2022, announced he would seek a third term in 2026 as a Republican. On Saturday, Democratic chairman Dale said he was not surprised by Dishman's announcement. He released an open letter he had sent to Dishman that said the city council member had not returned messages Dale sent via voicemail, e-mails and text messages since March. "I now read that you believe the local Democratic Party is disproportionally progressive," Dale wrote. "I don't share that assertion because I know that's factually untrue." Dale said his party is "an organization made up of a blended group of people who believe in supporting the U.S. Constitution, upholding the laws which serve as the guardrails for our society." The Democratic chairman also said "at-large and marginalized communities should be cared for and protected and nurtured to an extent where fear is exchanged for hope." Dale said what Dishman has "signed up for (as a Republican) is not what the Delaware County Democratic Party believes." Not surprisingly, Dale's Republican counterpart, Tim Overton, was more upbeat about Dishman's party change. The Republican chairman said Dishman "brings with him a distinguished record of public service, a lifetime of wisdom, strong relationships, and proven effectiveness that will strengthen our shared efforts." "With Mayor Dan Ridenour, the city council and Republican county leadership now aligned, we are uniquely positioned to partner more effectively than ever before," Overton said. He said a "common vision" focused on making Muncie "a safe, thriving community where families flourish and future generations choose to stay." Since Republican David Dominick unseated two-term Democratic Mayor James P. Carey in 1991, Republicans have won six of eight Muncie mayoral elections. However, until Dishman's announcement on Saturday, the past 34 years have seen local Democrats retain a majority on Muncie City Council. Roger Overbey, a former Democratic city council member, attended Saturday's event that saw Dishman announce his party change and posed for photos with his former council colleague. Douglas Walker is a news reporter for The Star Press. Contact him at 765-213-5851 or at dwalker@ This article originally appeared on Muncie Star Press: Council member Dishman leaves Democrats, joins Republicans
