Michigan Advance

LANSING — Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel joined a lawsuit alongside 21 other state attorneys general against the U.S. Department of Agriculture over guidance issued by the department. The lawsuit said the new guidance would eliminate eligibility for legal immigrants who had previously been eligible to receive such benefits, including those who had been granted asylum or refugee status.

The guidance, issued at the end of October, was intended to provide instructions on how to implement program changes passed in July as a part of H.R. 1, also known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which narrowed eligibility for noncitizens. “The guidance in reality goes beyond the act, arbitrarily excluding from SNAP many lawful permanent residents who remain eligible under the statutory scheme established by Congress,” the lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court of Oregon Eugene Division said.

Nothing in the bill, the filing continues, would prohibit individuals who were at one point refugees, individuals granted asylum, or parolees, now groups no longer eligible for SNAP, from gaining eligibility for the program if and when they gain status as lawful permanent residents. “The law is clear on who can receive SNAP benefits, yet the Trump Administration is trying to strip rightful recipients of the support they need to feed their families,” Nessel said in a press release from her office. “It is my hope that the Court puts an end to this unlawful guidance and stops the White House’s ongoing chaos and confusion over Americans’ ability to put food on the table.”

The lawsuit is seeking an injunction to the changes that would prevent states from implementing the eligibility changes in question. Nessel and 20 other attorneys general sent a letter to U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins last week asking for clarification on the new guidance, but they did not receive a response from Rollins.

The lawsuit also alleges that the U.S. Department of Agriculture misapplied its own rules on new regulations about SNAP error rates within states — the legislation passed in July gave a 120-day window for states to address their error rates, but the guidance issued in October stated that the window for that exclusionary period would end on Nov. 1 — a Saturday, one day after the guidance was issued.

The calculation was done based on the day of the passage of the bill initially, not when the guidance was issued, which Nessel and the other attorneys general argue is incorrect based on federal laws.