2026年6月23日 / 美国东部时间中午12:28 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
一名联邦法官阻止了特朗普政府允许各州禁止食品券（SNAP）受助者使用食品福利购买软饮料和糖果的举措，裁定农业部无权批准此类限制措施。
今年早些时候，多个州获得农业部批准实施这项禁令，卫生部长小罗伯特·F·肯尼迪和农业部长布鲁克·罗林斯支持这项举措，旨在将被视为不健康的食品从这项规模达1000亿美元的联邦计划中剔除。
然而，科罗拉多州、艾奥瓦州、内布拉斯加州、田纳西州和西弗吉尼亚州这5个州的SNAP受助者于3月起诉了该机构，指控此举将“破坏食品券受助者的食品获取稳定性”。他们还辩称，这项禁令会让患有慢性病的人难以获取维持健康所需的食品或饮品，包括用于调节血糖的物品。
在周一的裁决中，法官艾米·伯曼·杰克逊支持原告方，称农业部允许各州实施这项禁令的行为超出了其职权范围。
“国会已经明确了‘食品’的定义，并未授权该机构修改或放弃其制定的定义，”她在裁决意见中写道。“国会也未授权该机构彻底将某些食品类别从SNAP计划中剔除。”
SNAP计划每月发放福利，帮助低收入美国人支付食品杂货费用。虽然这是一项联邦资助项目，但食品券由美国各州分别管理。
农业部为这项举措进行了辩护，并誓言将继续推进“让美国再次健康”倡议。
“纳税人的钱不应用于购买垃圾食品，这一观点不应存在争议，”美国农业部发言人在给哥伦比亚广播公司新闻的一份声明中表示。“我们不会放弃为让美国再次健康而战，包括为依赖SNAP计划的家庭和社区而战。”
反饥饿倡导组织食品研究与行动中心（FRAC）表示，尽管这项裁决仅适用于原告所在的5个州，但可能会对其余18个实施类似禁令的州产生影响。
“其他获得批准的SNAP限制试点项目都依赖于相同的农业部流程、相同的法定权限，以及法院驳回的许多相同法律和程序假设，”FRAC的SNAP项目主任吉娜·普拉塔-尼诺在周二的一篇博客文章中表示。“正因如此，该裁决可能为未来的诉讼提供指引。”
“让美国再次健康”计划遭遇挫折
这项裁决对肯尼迪和罗林斯倡导的“让美国再次健康”运动是一次打击，二人辩称纳税人不应为助长肥胖、糖尿病和慢性病流行的食品和饮品买单。
“我们不能继续维持这样一个体系：迫使纳税人资助损害人们健康的项目，然后再次掏钱治疗这些项目催生的疾病，”肯尼迪在去年12月的一份声明中说道。
截至目前，农业部已通过豁免条款允许23个州实施限制措施，禁止SNAP受助者购买联邦法律通常允许购买的某些食品和饮料。
管理SNAP计划的《食品与营养法》允许食品券用于“任何供人类食用的食品或食品产品”，但酒精和即食热食除外。该法律还禁止SNAP受助者使用福利购买烟草制品。
代表原告的非营利组织国家法律与经济正义中心辩称，各州不同的逐州定义给零售商和SNAP受助者带来了困惑。
“这一裁决明确表明，农业部不能绕过确立SNAP计划全国统一运营方式的法律界限，”国家法律与经济正义中心的高级律师凯蒂·迪布尔在一份声明中说道。
本文由艾梅·皮奇编辑
美联社为本报道提供了素材。
Trump administration can’t block SNAP recipients in 5 states from buying soda and candy, judge rules
June 23, 2026 / 12:28 PM EDT / CBS News
A federal judge blocked the Trump administration’s effort to let states bar SNAP recipients from using their food benefits to buy soft drinks and candy, ruling the Agriculture Department lacked the authority to approve the restrictions.
Earlier this year, multiple states received approval from the Agriculture Department to enact the ban, with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins backing the efforts as a way to strip foods regarded as unhealthy from the $100 billion federal program.
However, SNAP recipients in five states — Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee and West Virginia — sued the agency in March, alleging the move would “destabilize food access” for people on food stamps. They also argued that the ban makes it difficult for people with chronic illnesses to access food or drinks needed to maintain their health, including items used to manage blood sugar.
In her Monday ruling, Judge Amy Berman Jackson sided with the plaintiffs, writing that the Agriculture Department exceeded its authority when it allowed states to issue the ban.
“Congress defined what ‘food’ is supposed to be, and it did not authorize the agency to amend or waive the definition it enacted,” she wrote in her opinion. “It did not authorize the agency to cut types of food out of SNAP entirely.”
SNAP provides monthly benefits to help low-income Americans pay for groceries. While it’s a federally funded program, food stamps are administered by each U.S. state.
The Agriculture Department defended the effort and vowed to continue pursuing the “Make America Healthy Again” initiative.
“The idea that taxpayer funds should not be used to purchase junk food should not be controversial,” a USDA spokesperson said in a statement to CBS News. “We will not be backing down from the fight to Make America Healthy Again, including for families and communities reliant on SNAP.”
While the ruling only applies to the five states where the plaintiffs live, it could have implications for the remaining 18 states with similar bans, according to the Food Research & Action Center, or FRAC, an anti-hunger advocacy group.
“Other approved SNAP restriction demonstrations relied on the same USDA process, the same statutory authority and many of the same legal and procedural assumptions the court rejected,” Gina Plata-Nino, SNAP director for FRAC, said in a Tuesday blog post. “For that reason, the decision may provide a roadmap for future challenges.”
Setback for “Make America Healthy Again”
The ruling is a setback for the “Make America Healthy Again” campaign championed by Kennedy and Rollins, who have argued taxpayers shouldn’t foot the bill for foods and drinks that fuel obesity, diabetes and chronic disease epidemics.
“We cannot continue a system that forces taxpayers to fund programs that make people sick and then pay a second time to treat the illnesses those very programs help create,” Kennedy said in a December statement.
So far, the Agriculture Department has permitted 23 states to implement restrictions through waivers that allowed them to block SNAP recipients from buying certain food and beverages that are normally allowed under federal law.
The Food and Nutrition Act, which governs SNAP, allows food stamps to be used for “any food or food product intended for human consumption,” except for alcohol and ready-to-eat hot foods. The law also bars SNAP recipients from using benefits to buy tobacco.
The National Center for Law and Economic Justice, a nonprofit representing the plaintiffs, argued the different state-by-state definitions led to confusion for retailers and SNAP recipients.
“This decision makes clear that the USDA cannot bypass the legal guardrails that establish how SNAP must operate across the country,” Katie Deabler, senior attorney at the National Center for Law and Economic Justice, said in a statement.
Edited by Aimee Picchi
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
发表回复