Johnny McConnell has made his decision; now let him enforce it.
- Thread starter Diogenes
- Start date
Congress has not funded current operations of SNAP and other government programs, the court first directed the administration to use SNAP contingency funding appropriated earlier by Congress to cover emergencies like wars and natural disasters. But when the administration warned the court that the available contingency funding would only cover partial benefits for the month of November, the court ordered the administration to disregard congressional appropriations and just find money from other funds that it could use.
On pg. 7, the court tells the executive branch which piles of money it should consider using, granting the judiciary the power of the purse:
On pg. 7, the court tells the executive branch which piles of money it should consider using, granting the judiciary the power of the purse:
Ordering the administration to use SNAP contingency money to pay for SNAP, the court was arguably still wandering near the boundaries of the division of power. But now the court is pointing at other funds and directing the president to raid them, even if that’s not what Congress said those funds were for.
You can read about Section 32 here: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12193
It’s USDA funding for farm support programs, which a judge now says are actually for SNAP, on the power of his word. He has re-appropriated it.
He has the power of the purse.
You can read about Section 32 here: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12193
It’s USDA funding for farm support programs, which a judge now says are actually for SNAP, on the power of his word. He has re-appropriated it.
He has the power of the purse.
Depends ….He is a Democrat so that I’d Differential
Judge McConnell blocked DOGE funding cuts and think he can force the POTUS to make SNAP payments.
Did you know he is involved in a nonprofit that received $180 million in government funding through deals with SNAP?
And he didn’t feel the need to recuse himself.
Judge McConnell (an Obama appointee) issued an order on November 6, 2025, requiring the Trump administration to fully fund November SNAP (food stamp) benefits for millions of Americans, drawing from contingency funds or other sources.
This came as a result of the Schumer shutdown and broader disputes over federal spending freezes implemented by the administration and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
McConnell has deep, ongoing ties to Crossroads Rhode Island, a nonprofit homeless services organization:
His rulings directly benefit organizations like Crossroads by forcing the release of frozen federal funds. This creates a clear financial and fiduciary conflict—his organization stands to gain millions from decisions he makes on the bench.
- He served as its board chairman for years and remains listed as "Chair Emeritus."
- He has been a director on its IRS Form 990 filings every year since 2013 (even after becoming a judge).
- Crossroads has received at least $128–180 million in federal funding over the past two decades, including HUD grants, SNAP-related services, and other government contracts.
Under federal law (28 U.S.C. § 455), a judge must recuse if their "impartiality might reasonably be questioned" or if they have a financial interest (even indirect) in the subject matter.
Judicial ethics canons reinforce this: even the appearance of bias demands stepping aside.
The venue-shopping and docket scraping was planned, and executed to make sure. This wasn't an overnight reaction.
Why could we file this brief only this morning, with that clock ticking? The First Circuit clerk’s office made it impossible to file sooner. Despite being notified by the government of the high likelihood of fast-moving litigation, the First Circuit clerk’s office refused to answer its phones until this morning, and refused to offer any means of filing this emergency request until it processed certain paperwork during regular business hours.
View: https://x.com/AGPamBondi/status/1986851106258100301
View: https://x.com/AGPamBondi/status/1986851106258100301
Here's the actual situation as of ~1:45 PM ET Nov 7:
The motion is only a few hours old on a Friday; Federal Circuit courts don't move at the same speed Brad does when he's chasing an ambulance.
- The DOJ's emergency stay motion is handled by a single duty judge for emergency matters in the First Circuit (standard procedure under their IOPs—no three-judge panel has been assigned yet, and none will be until/if the duty judge refers it).
- No judge's name appears on the docket for this motion. The First Circuit hasn't identified who is reviewing it.
- The court ordered plaintiffs to respond by noon (they did) and explicitly told DOJ a ruling might not come by their requested 4PM deadline. That's normal appellate pacing on a Friday for a complex separation-of-powers fight.
- The First Circuits' active judges are split (3 Obama, 2 Clinton, 1 Trump)—but this is one judge right now, supposedly randomly assigned.
The motion is only a few hours old on a Friday; Federal Circuit courts don't move at the same speed Brad does when he's chasing an ambulance.
Jake Starkey
Verified User
McConnell is not negotiating.
...........STFU and sit your ass down"
The Trump administration is litigating a funding dispute during a government shutdown, not intentionally breaking laws to deny benefits.
They've pledged $4.65 billion from USDA contingency funds to cover most of November's SNAP payments and are appealing Johnny McConnell's order, which deemed the amount available insufficient, despite the fact that he knew beforehand the contingency monies Congress previously appropriated would be insufficient to cover an unprecedented 38 day funding gap.
This reflects policy and legal contention over reserves, not deliberate starvation of anyone, as hysterical Democrats are alleging.
Uniformed claims of "intentional law-breaking" exaggerate routine executive-branch challenges to judicial rulings.
They've pledged $4.65 billion from USDA contingency funds to cover most of November's SNAP payments and are appealing Johnny McConnell's order, which deemed the amount available insufficient, despite the fact that he knew beforehand the contingency monies Congress previously appropriated would be insufficient to cover an unprecedented 38 day funding gap.
This reflects policy and legal contention over reserves, not deliberate starvation of anyone, as hysterical Democrats are alleging.
Uniformed claims of "intentional law-breaking" exaggerate routine executive-branch challenges to judicial rulings.
- The Trump administration appealed McConnell's decision to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, requesting a stay, but the court denied the request late today.
- Blue states like Massachusetts and New York are preparing to distribute full SNAP benefits as early as Saturday and Sunday, respectively.
- The Justice Department has escalated the issue by filing an emergency application with the Supreme Court to challenge the lower court's ruling.
- This follows a lawsuit by Democracy Forward, a leftist legal advocacy group, which argued the administration must fund SNAP during the entire Schumer shutdown.
The Trump administration has filed an emergency application with the Supreme Court to challenge the lower court’s ruling, requesting a decision by 9:30 PM EST tonight.
The Supreme Court could:
The Supreme Court could:
- Grant the stay, halting the distribution of full SNAP benefits until the appeal is resolved.
- Deny the stay, allowing the lower court’s order to stand, meaning states would proceed with distributing full November SNAP benefits.
- Request additional briefing or delay a decision, which could push the resolution into Saturday or beyond.
- The underlying Schumer shutdown continues to drive this conflict. Passage of the clean funding resolution, potentially moots the legal battle.
A single district court judge whose wife's organization stands to benefit monetarily from his ruling should not be able to seize federal funds in order to shift the political blame for the Schumer shutdown, and seek to dictate its own preferences for how limited available federal funds should be spent.
If Trump wanted to take action and make himself look better, remove the leverage, he could do what the Judge said and when folks get upset at him for spending without appropriations he can just point to the Judge... He can use the man as cover to actually act like a king, ignore the constitution and pay for SNAP... Let the democrats tell us why it is "eeEEEevilll"...
Just saying.. If he wanted to play politics, this is a great opportunity.
Just saying.. If he wanted to play politics, this is a great opportunity.
Sound like a king.