Full Breakdown
Federal Judge Blocks SNAP Sugar Restrictions
6/24/2026, 12:02:25 AM
Core Event: Court Halts USDA Waivers in Five States
On June 22, 2026, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson issued a 68-page ruling that vacated and remanded USDA-approved waivers allowing five states—Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee and West Virginia—to prohibit SNAP participants from purchasing sugary drinks, candy, gum and related items. Jackson concluded the USDA lacked statutory authority to redefine “food” under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 and failed to provide required public notice.
Background & Context: “Make America Healthy Again” Initiative
The waivers were part of the Trump administration’s “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) movement, championed by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins. By early 2025, the USDA had approved “food-restriction” waivers in 23 states, permitting those jurisdictions to bar SNAP benefits from covering sugary products. The initiative aimed to address obesity and related health concerns, particularly among low-income populations.
Key Figures & Groups
- Judge Amy Berman Jackson – Senior U.S. District Judge, District of Columbia.
- U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) – Federal agency administering SNAP.
- Brooke Rollins – USDA Secretary, signatory on waiver approvals.
- Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – HHS Secretary, public supporter of the waivers.
- National Center for Law and Economic Justice (NCLEJ) – Nonprofit representing the plaintiffs.
- Nebraska Appleseed – Advocacy group opposing the restrictions.
- Governor Kim Reynolds – Iowa governor, proponent of the original waivers.
- Plaintiffs – SNAP recipients from the five affected states, including Marc Craig (Iowa) who cited diabetes and kidney-disease management needs.
Data & Statistics
- SNAP serves roughly 42 million low-income Americans.
- Prior to the ruling, 23 states had received USDA “food-restriction” waivers; at least 18 states were reported to have enacted such waivers.
- The five states targeted by the lawsuit had implemented the restrictions on January 1, 2026.
Official Statements & Responses
The USDA reiterated its stance that taxpayer funds should not support “junk food,” asserting it will continue pursuing MAHA objectives. NCLEJ’s attorney Katharine Deabler-Meadows described the decision as a restoration of essential assistance. Nebraska’s Department of Health and Human Services indicated it will await further USDA guidance, while the agency has not confirmed whether it will appeal. Governor Reynolds criticized the ruling as “short-sighted” and maintained that state-level reforms remain necessary to combat obesity.
Criticism & Opposition
Nebraska Appleseed argued the waivers created “major hurdles for families and retailers,” especially in rural areas, and that the changes threaten basic food security. Iowa officials, including Governor Reynolds, contended that the court’s decision undermines state efforts to promote healthier nutrition. Advocacy groups emphasized that the restrictions limited access to items used by some recipients to manage medical conditions such as diabetes and allergies.
Verbatim Quotes
- “ The USDA shared a statement to Reuters, saying “the idea that taxpayer funds should not be used to purchase junk food should not be controversial.” — USDA spokesperson
- “The court’s ruling is a major step in restoring essential food assistance to the millions of families that rely on SNAP nationwide,” — Katharine Deabler-Meadows, NCLEJ attorney
- “All of these changes of SNAP are meaning that fewer people have what they need to survive," said Eric Savaiano with Nebraska Appleseed.” — Eric Savaiano, Nebraska Appleseed
- “I’m proud that Iowa is among the states leading the type of SNAP reforms necessary to promote better nutrition, health, and well-being,” — Governor Kim Reynolds
- “this decision makes clear that the USDA cannot bypass the legal guardrails that establish how SNAP must operate across the country. It affirms that families deserve a program that works without confusion.” — NCLEJ statement
- “Improving the health and diet of SNAP recipients is not included,” — Judge Amy Berman Jackson
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Sources differ on the total number of states with approved waivers: Reuters cites 23 states, while other outlets reference “at least 18 states.” No public comment was obtained from the USDA or the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services at the time of publication, leaving the agency’s next procedural steps unclear.
What’s Next
The USDA signaled it will not abandon the MAHA initiative, suggesting possible appellate action. State agencies in the five affected jurisdictions have indicated they will review the ruling and consider alternative strategies to address nutrition without violating federal SNAP regulations.
