21 Blue States Refuse To Turn Over Their Data On The SNAP Program

[Rawley]

See above dipshit.

Attaboy "dipshit"

 

[citygator]

Attaboy "dipshit"

Like I said. The law doest grant unfettered access to data as it is restricted per the section I linked. Sorry to shove facts up your ass.

 

[citygator]

Smart move abandoning your bullshit lie that the states don't have to provide the SNAP data and retreating to your safe place of denigrating the poor.

I did provide the law section so clearly that even a dipshit can read it.

 

[Rawley]

Like I said. The law doest grant unfettered access to data as it is restricted per the section I linked. Sorry to shove facts up your ass.

Hey "dipshit" you started your bullshit claiming "Feds are not entitled to personal data of American"

No you are posting the law that clearly states

(A) the safeguards shall permit-

(i) the disclosure of such information to persons directly connected with the administration or enforcement of the provisions of this chapter, regulations issued pursuant to this chapter, Federal assistance programs, or federally-assisted State programs;

Which of these words don't you understand "dipshit?"

 

[Rawley]

I did provide the law section so clearly that even a dipshit can read it.

Well, clearly you're a "dipshit" that is having difficulty reading

(A) the safeguards shall permit-

(i) the disclosure of such information to persons directly connected with the administration or enforcement of the provisions of this chapter, regulations issued pursuant to this chapter, Federal assistance programs, or federally-assisted State programs;

 

[citygator]

Hey "dipshit" you started your bullshit claiming "Feds are not entitled to personal data of American"

No you are posting the law that clearly states


Which of these words don't you understand "dipshit?"

Don't listen to me listen to the courts which consistently say:
§2020(a)(3)
→ allows USDA audit access only to the extent necessary to verify program integrity.
§2020(e)(8)
→ prohibits creating a “national registry” of SNAP recipients and prohibits bulk personal-data handover unless specifically authorized.

This is exactly why judges in 2025 granted injunctions blocking USDA’s attempt to require states to send complete personal data files for all SNAP recipients.

The courts ruled:
✔ USDA can demand audits
✖ USDA cannot require states to transmit all individual personal data into a federal database unless the statute expressly authorizes it — and §2020(e)(8) restricts, not expands, those disclosures.

 

[martybegan]

You have to read it in conjunction with this is the section (e8) that limits disclosure of SNAP recipients’ personal information. And it is specifically cross-referenced in the paragraph you quoted (a3). It does not grant the federal government unlimited access to all individual personal data in bulk.

CHAPTER 51-SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

e:
(8) safeguards which prohibit the use or disclosure of information obtained from applicant households, except that-

(A) the safeguards shall permit-

(i) the disclosure of such information to persons directly connected with the administration or enforcement of the provisions of this chapter, regulations issued pursuant to this chapter, Federal assistance programs, or federally-assisted State programs; and

(ii) the subsequent use of the information by persons described in clause (i) only for such administration or enforcement;


(B) the safeguards shall not prevent the use or disclosure of such information to the Comptroller General of the United States for audit and examination authorized by any other provision of law;

(C) notwithstanding any other provision of law, all information obtained under this chapter from an applicant household shall be made available, upon request, to local, State or Federal law enforcement officials for the purpose of investigating an alleged violation of this chapter or any regulation issued under this chapter;

(D) the safeguards shall not prevent the use by, or disclosure of such information, to agencies of the Federal Government (including the United States Postal Service) for purposes of collecting the amount of an overissuance of benefits, as determined under section 2022(b) of this title, from Federal pay (including salaries and pensions) as authorized pursuant to section 5514 of title 5 or a Federal income tax refund as authorized by section 3720A of title 31;

(E) notwithstanding any other provision of law, the address, social security number, and, if available, photograph of any member of a household shall be made available, on request, to any Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer if the officer furnishes the State agency with the name of the member and notifies the agency that-

(i) the member-

(I) is fleeing to avoid prosecution, or custody or confinement after conviction, for a crime (or attempt to commit a crime) that, under the law of the place the member is fleeing, is a felony (or, in the case of New Jersey, a high misdemeanor), or is violating a condition of probation or parole imposed under Federal or State law; or

(II) has information that is necessary for the officer to conduct an official duty related to subclause (I);


(ii) locating or apprehending the member is an official duty; and

(iii) the request is being made in the proper exercise of an official duty; and


(F) the safeguards shall not prevent compliance with paragraph (15) or (18)(B) or subsection (u);

And it says federals can look at it, right in your link, you dumb ****.

This is an audit, this isn't a release of data to the public or another agency.

 

[citygator]

Well, clearly you're a "dipshit" that is having difficulty reading

Here are several recent court rulings (and filings) challenging the attempt by United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to require states to hand over full personal data on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients.

• State of California et al. v. USDA (N.D. Cal., filed July 28, 2025) — the lead challenge to USDA’s data-demand. The complaint argues that USDA’s demand exceeds the authority granted under the SNAP Act.
• Pallek v. Rollins (D.D.C., filed May 2025) — a separate lawsuit seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) against USDA’s data-collection plan for SNAP.
• On September 19, 2025, a federal judge (Maxine M. Chesney) issued a temporary restraining order blocking USDA from enforcing its demands for personal SNAP data in 21 states + D.C. The court found the states were “likely to succeed” in their argument that the SNAP law prohibits such bulk disclosure.
• In mid-October 2025, the court extended that protection: a preliminary injunction was granted that continues to block USDA’s demand while the lawsuit proceeds.

 

[martybegan]

Don't listen to me listen to the courts which consistently say:
§2020(a)(3)
→ allows USDA audit access only to the extent necessary to verify program integrity.
§2020(e)(8)
→ prohibits creating a “national registry” of SNAP recipients and prohibits bulk personal-data handover unless specifically authorized.

This is exactly why judges in 2025 granted injunctions blocking USDA’s attempt to require states to send complete personal data files for all SNAP recipients.

The courts ruled:
✔ USDA can demand audits
✖ USDA cannot require states to transmit all individual personal data into a federal database unless the statute expressly authorizes it — and §2020(e)(8) restricts, not expands, those disclosures.

Of course lefty judges would rule that.

It's based on NOTHING.

 

[citygator]

Of course lefty judges would rule that.

It's based on NOTHING.

Sigh. Everything is a conspiracy. Ive shown you the text of the law and shown you court rulings. I cant help it if you are in a cult. All I can do is offer you the light to see yourself out. Up to you to follow the light or not.

 

[Rawley]

Here are several recent court rulings (and filings) challenging the attempt by United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to require states to hand over full personal data on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients.

• State of California et al. v. USDA (N.D. Cal., filed July 28, 2025) — the lead challenge to USDA’s data-demand. The complaint argues that USDA’s demand exceeds the authority granted under the SNAP Act.
• Pallek v. Rollins (D.D.C., filed May 2025) — a separate lawsuit seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO) against USDA’s data-collection plan for SNAP.
• On September 19, 2025, a federal judge (Maxine M. Chesney) issued a temporary restraining order blocking USDA from enforcing its demands for personal SNAP data in 21 states + D.C. The court found the states were “likely to succeed” in their argument that the SNAP law prohibits such bulk disclosure.
• In mid-October 2025, the court extended that protection: a preliminary injunction was granted that continues to block USDA’s demand while the lawsuit proceeds.

Bets on how long before that nonsense is overturned?

The majority of states have already complied? You have to question what are these state trying to hide.

 

[Rawley]

Of course lefty judges would rule that.

It's based on NOTHING.

 

[martybegan]

Sigh. Everything is a conspiracy. Ive shown you the text of the law and shown you court rulings. I cant help it if you are in a cult. All I can do is offer you the light to see yourself out. Up to you to follow the light or not.

You show excerpts of laws, then bullshit interpretations of them.

"You can audit, but you can't get the information needed to do an audit"

 

[citygator]

Bets on how long before that nonsense is overturned?

The majority of states have already complied? You have to question what are these state trying to hide.

It's an overstep of federal authority. I can craft all kinds of situations where you wouldnt want the federal government overstepping its authority.

 

[citygator]

You show excerpts of laws, then bullshit interpretations of them.

"You can audit, but you can't get the information needed to do an audit"

The courts agree with the states. The law agrees with the states. Trump wants to do whatever. It wont be Trump forever so I would advise you not forfeit your rights to whatever the president wants to do. President AOC may want you to do something you dont like.

 

[martybegan]

The courts agree with the states. The law agrees with the states. Trump wants to do whatever. It wont be Trump forever so I would advise you not forfeit your rights to whatever the president wants to do. President AOC may want you to do something you dont like.

The lower biased district courts and biased State courts. These will be overturned on appeal just like all the others.

Any federal aid I would get in the future I would be entitled to, so audit away.

 

[martybegan]

It's an overstep of federal authority. I can craft all kinds of situations where you wouldnt want the federal government overstepping its authority.

The federal government is spending the $$ they have the right to audit the programs.

To audit the programs they need all the data requested.

 

[Rawley]

It's an overstep of federal authority. I can craft all kinds of situations where you wouldnt want the federal government overstepping its authority.

I'm sure you could. But they aren't here. In the SNAP program, Fed are literally giving people hundreds of dollars in free shit every month, they have every right to know who you are.

What's your argument they aren't?

 

[citygator]

The lower biased district courts and biased State courts. These will be overturned on appeal just like all the others.

Any federal aid I would get in the future I would be entitled to, so audit away.

All the others are not being overturned. You made that up or are not paying attention. Trump has lost more cases than anyone in modern times.

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/projects-series/trials-of-the-trump-administration/tracking-trump-administration-litigation

 

[martybegan]

All the others are not being overturned. You made that up or are not paying attention. Trump has lost more cases than anyone in modern times.

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/projects-series/trials-of-the-trump-administration/tracking-trump-administration-litigation

In district courts, His admin wins more on appeal than loses.

Of course you point to the District courts, you dime store hack.