2026-06-22T23:07:28.995Z / reuters.com
华盛顿6月22日路透电 华盛顿特区一名联邦法官周一阻止特朗普政府，禁止五个州的食品券领取者使用福利购买含糖食品和饮料。
美国地区法官艾米·伯曼·杰克逊
裁定美国农业部没有联邦法律授权，批准各州提出的禁止补充营养援助计划（简称SNAP，即食品券项目）领取者使用福利购买苏打水、糖果等含糖食品和饮料的申请。她支持了五名原告的主张，这些原告认为此类限制会削弱他们获取食物的权利。
通过《每日案卷》新闻简报获取最新法律资讯，直接发送至您的收件箱。点击此处注册。
美国农业部已在23个州批准了“食品限制”豁免申请，允许这些州限制SNAP参与者使用福利购买苏打水、糖果等产品。农业部长布鲁克·罗林斯和卫生与公众服务部长小罗伯特·F·肯尼迪支持这些豁免申请，将其作为“让美国再次健康”（MAHA）运动的一部分。
SNAP通常被称为食品券项目，每月向4200万低收入美国人提供福利，由美国农业部与州政府合作管理。
“联邦被告和各州或许确实希望通过鼓励商店内的健康选择来改善SNAP受助家庭的健康状况，他们可以采取合法措施实现这些目标，”杰克逊说道，“但他们不能做的是违反法律以及他们自己的相关规定。”
美国农业部为这项政策辩护，并表示将继续推进限制SNAP福利用于特定食品的举措。
“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一份声明中表示，“美国农业部不会放弃为‘让美国再次健康’而战，包括为依赖SNAP的家庭和社区而战。”
原告分别居住在科罗拉多州、艾奥瓦州、内布拉斯加州州、田纳西州和西弗吉尼亚州。他们在3月份的诉讼中表示，自己或家人依靠受限制的食品来管理糖尿病、过敏等健康状况，或获取维持日常生活所需的能量。
他们请求法院在各自州叫停这些限制措施。
“这一裁决是在恢复全美数百万依赖SNAP的家庭所必需的食品援助方面迈出的重要一步，”代表原告的全国法律与经济正义中心律师凯瑟琳·迪布尔-米多斯说道。
在周一的裁决中，杰克逊表示，美国农业部只能根据美国法律允许的有限用途批准豁免申请，例如提高SNAP项目的运营效率。
“改善SNAP受助者的健康和饮食并不包含在内，”杰克逊说道。
布菜克·布里坦华盛顿报道 亚历克西亚·加拉姆法尔维与桑吉·米格兰尼编辑
我们的准则：路透社信托原则。
US judge blocks Trump administration SNAP restrictions on soda, candy
2026-06-22T23:07:28.995Z / reuters.com
WASHINGTON, June 22 (Reuters) – A federal judge in Washington, D.C., on Monday blocked the Trump administration from preventing food stamp recipients in five states from using their benefits to buy sugary foods and drinks.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson
ruled that the U.S. Department of Agriculture lacked the authority under federal law to approve state requests to bar recipients of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, from using benefits to buy sugary foods and drinks. She sided with five plaintiffs who argued the restrictions would undermine their access to food.
Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.
The USDA has approved “food restriction” waivers in 23 states allowing them to restrict SNAP participants from using their benefits to buy products such as soda and candy. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have endorsed the waivers as part of the “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) movement.
SNAP, commonly known as the food stamp program, provides monthly benefits to 42 million low-income Americans, and is administered by the USDA in partnership with state governments.
“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,” Jackson said. “But what they cannot do is violate the law and their own regulations along the way.”
The USDA defended the policy and signaled it would continue pursuing restrictions on the use of SNAP benefits for certain foods.
“The idea that taxpayer funds should not be used to purchase junk food should not be controversial,” a USDA spokesperson said in a statement. “USDA will not be backing down from the fight to Make America Healthy Again, including for families and communities reliant on SNAP.”
The plaintiffs — who live in Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee and West Virginia — said in their March lawsuit that they or family members rely on the restricted foods to manage health conditions such as diabetes and allergies, or to obtain energy boosts needed to conduct their daily lives.
They asked the court to block the restrictions in their respective states.
“The court’s ruling is a major step in restoring essential food assistance to the millions of families that rely on SNAP nationwide,” said Katharine Deabler-Meadows, an attorney for the plaintiffs at the National Center for Law and Economic Justice.
In Monday’s ruling, Jackson said the USDA could approve waivers only for limited purposes allowed under U.S. law such as improving the efficiency of the SNAP program.
“Improving the health and diet of SNAP recipients is not included,” Jackson said.
Reporting by Blake Brittain in Washington, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Sanjeev Miglani
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
发表回复