Minnesota Sues Federal Government to Block “Impossible” SNAP Mandate

SAINT PAUL — Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison has filed for emergency relief in federal court, seeking to block a directive from the U.S. Department of Agriculture that state officials warn could disrupt food assistance for nearly 450,000 Minnesotans.

At the center of the dispute is a December letter from the USDA ordering Minnesota to verify the eligibility of roughly 100,000 Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program households through in person interviews within 30 days. The deadline, which expires January 15, applies to recipients in Hennepin, Ramsey, Washington, and Wright counties and is backed by the threat of federal penalties, including the potential loss of administrative funding or broader program sanctions.

Ellison’s emergency motion asks a judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota to temporarily block enforcement of the directive while the case proceeds. The filing argues that the mandate amounts to an unlawful pilot project imposed without statutory authority and without following required federal rulemaking procedures.

A crisis by the numbers

The four counties targeted by the USDA account for nearly half of Minnesota’s SNAP caseload. State filings and county estimates outline the scale of the challenge:

• More than 440,000 Minnesotans rely on SNAP each month
• Approximately 150,000 children live in households receiving benefits
• Hennepin County alone estimates it would need about 60,000 overtime staff hours at a cost of roughly $4 million to meet the deadline
• Washington County reports it would require more than 100 fully trained staff members immediately, despite training timelines that typically exceed six months
• Wright County estimates its existing staff would need to work nearly 20 hours per day, including holidays, to comply

State officials argue that such demands are not only unrealistic but risk widespread benefit disruptions as eligible households miss interviews they cannot reasonably schedule on short notice.

Legal arguments and political tensions

In its lawsuit, Minnesota contends that the USDA directive violates both the Food and Nutrition Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. The state argues that federal law does not permit USDA to mandate in person interviews for a pilot initiative of this scope without proper notice, congressional authorization, or collaboration with states administering the program.

Ellison characterized the directive as an attempt to weaponize administrative procedures against low income families. He said the state would not allow federal officials to use food assistance as leverage in broader political disputes.

The case adds to a year of heightened friction between Minnesota and the federal government. Earlier in 2025, the Walz administration joined other states in challenging federal data demands related to benefit recipients. Later in the year, a nearly month-long federal government shutdown forced Minnesota to seek court intervention to ensure continuity of SNAP funding.

The accuracy debate

USDA officials have justified the verification surge as an effort to improve program integrity, citing Minnesota’s 8.98 percent SNAP payment error rate in 2024. State and county leaders counter that payment error rates include both overpayments and underpayments, many driven by administrative complexity rather than fraud.

Minnesota also notes that its error rate remains better than that of more than 30 other states and territories, undermining the rationale for singling out the state for an accelerated enforcement action.

County administrators have warned that redirecting staff to meet the federal mandate would degrade service across other safety net programs, compounding delays and increasing the likelihood of errors rather than reducing them.

What happens next

The federal court is expected to rule on the emergency request before the January 15 deadline. If the court grants a temporary restraining order or injunction, Minnesota would continue administering SNAP under existing rules while the legal challenge proceeds. If the request is denied, state officials warn that tens of thousands of eligible families could face interruptions or loss of benefits simply because the system cannot accommodate the required interviews in time.

For now, Minnesota officials emphasize that SNAP benefits remain in place and that recipients should continue to follow any legitimate notices from their county offices while the case moves forward.

The lawsuit underscores a broader national debate over how SNAP is administered, who bears the cost of enforcement, and how far federal agencies can go in imposing rapid changes on state run systems that serve millions of Americans.

MinneapoliMedia