Listen to the article
The federal government’s push to acquire unprecedented levels of personal data on food assistance recipients has sparked a significant legal battle, with nearly half the states in the nation refusing to comply with new reporting requirements.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), 28 states and Guam have provided the detailed information requested, but 21 states—most with Democratic governors—are actively resisting the federal directive, culminating in a lawsuit against the administration.
The conflict stems from a USDA directive issued in July 2025, which dramatically expanded the scope of data states must share about their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients. While states have traditionally provided certain information to the federal government, the latest demands represent a substantial escalation.
“Never before has the federal government demanded that States turn over PII on their entire SNAP caseloads, much less home address, social security number, immigration status, and day-to-day grocery purchase information,” the resisting states wrote in their amended complaint.
The USDA’s July 24 letter required states to participate in building a “complete and accurate database” by providing comprehensive data from Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) processors or directly from state agencies. What distinguishes this request from routine reporting is the breadth of sensitive personal information demanded, including full names, Social Security numbers, birthdates, and residential addresses of all beneficiaries.
This unprecedented data collection effort has raised several concerns among the non-compliant states. Chief among them are privacy and cybersecurity risks associated with transmitting massive quantities of sensitive personal data, fears that the information might be used for purposes beyond SNAP administration—such as immigration enforcement—and allegations that the USDA is exceeding its statutory authority.
It’s worth noting that several states with the highest SNAP payment error rates—including California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, and Oregon—are among those refusing to comply, according to USDA databases. The administration maintains that more detailed data collection is necessary to reduce errors and combat fraud, while the states argue that privacy risks outweigh potential benefits and that the federal government lacks clear legal justification for such extensive information gathering.
While this legal dispute unfolds, SNAP remains one of America’s largest safety net programs. In fiscal year 2024, SNAP served approximately 41.7 million people monthly, with federal expenditures totaling $99.8 billion. The average monthly benefit per participant was $187.20.
The program operates under federally established eligibility criteria, not state-determined rules. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, households typically must demonstrate gross income below 130% of the federal poverty line—approximately $2,888 monthly for a family of three. Only U.S. citizens and specific categories of lawful immigrants, such as refugees and asylum seekers, qualify for benefits, with undocumented immigrants explicitly excluded.
Most able-bodied adults without dependents face work requirements, needing to log at least 80 hours of employment monthly or participate in approved employment programs to maintain eligibility.
The administration is considering potential funding penalties for states refusing to comply with the enhanced data requirements. This ongoing standoff highlights broader tensions regarding federal authority, data privacy protections, and the delicate balance between ensuring program integrity and safeguarding civil liberties.
As the legal proceedings continue, the outcome could establish important precedents for federal-state relations and the government’s authority to collect detailed personal information from vulnerable populations receiving public assistance.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
24 Comments
This is a complex issue with valid concerns on both sides. The federal government likely wants better oversight of SNAP, but the states have a point about privacy rights. Will be interesting to see the legal reasoning and outcome.
Agreed, it’s a nuanced situation. Curious to learn more about the specific legal arguments and potential compromises.
This is an important issue about the balance of power between state and federal governments, as well as the protection of personal data. I hope the courts can find a reasonable solution that upholds privacy rights while allowing necessary SNAP administration.
Interesting to see the legal battle over SNAP data requirements. Seems like a concerning precedent if the federal government can demand such detailed personal information from states. I wonder what the legal arguments on both sides are.
Yes, this raises some important privacy and federalism issues. The states have a valid point about the scope of data being requested.
As a SNAP recipient, I’m worried about the privacy implications of this new data collection. Our personal information should be protected, not shared so broadly with the federal government. Hoping the states prevail in this lawsuit.
Interesting to see states challenging the federal government over SNAP data requirements. While data reporting is important, the new demands do appear overly intrusive. Protecting individual privacy rights should be a key priority here.
Surprised to see so many states resisting the USDA’s new SNAP data requirements. Must be a pretty significant expansion of personal info being demanded. Will be watching this case closely to understand the full implications.
It’s good to see states standing up to the federal government’s overreach on SNAP data. Individual privacy rights must be protected, even as the government aims to improve program administration. Curious to see how this lawsuit progresses.
This SNAP data battle highlights the ongoing tension between federal and state power. While oversight is important, the scope of personal information being demanded raises serious privacy concerns. I’ll be curious to see how the courts rule on this.
The federal government’s push for more SNAP recipient data seems overreaching. States should have autonomy in administering social programs and protecting their residents’ privacy. Glad to see some states standing up against this directive.
Absolutely. The states are right to challenge this federal overreach. Hopefully the courts side with preserving state sovereignty and individual privacy rights.
The tension between state and federal authority is on full display here. While the government needs data to run SNAP effectively, the new requirements do appear to cross a line in terms of personal privacy. Hopefully a compromise can be reached.
Agreed, this is a delicate balance. The government has a legitimate interest in SNAP data, but the scope of the new demands seems excessive. A more reasonable middle ground would be ideal.
This is a complex issue with valid concerns on both sides. While data reporting is important, the federal government’s expanded demands on SNAP recipients’ personal information do seem overly broad. Reasonable safeguards are needed.
The federal government’s push for more SNAP recipient data is understandable, but the scale of the new requirements does seem excessive. Curious to see how this lawsuit unfolds and what compromises might be reached.
Agreed, there needs to be a balanced approach that respects individual privacy while still allowing the government to effectively administer the SNAP program. Hopefully the courts can provide some clarity on this complex issue.
The federal government’s push for more SNAP data is concerning. States should have autonomy over their social programs and not be forced to hand over so much sensitive personal info. Curious to see how this court case plays out.
Agreed, the federal overreach on this seems quite problematic. States need to stand firm to protect their residents’ privacy.
This highlights the ongoing tensions between state and federal authority. While data reporting is important, the government must balance that with respecting individual privacy rights. Curious to see how this lawsuit plays out.
Definitely a complex issue. The federal government needs data to administer SNAP effectively, but the new requirements do seem excessively broad. A compromise may be needed to meet both sides’ needs.
The USDA’s expanded data demands on SNAP recipients raise valid privacy concerns. States are right to challenge this federal overreach, though I wonder if there’s room for a middle ground that addresses both sides’ needs.
Interesting legal battle over SNAP data requirements. It’s concerning to see the federal government pushing for such an expansive level of personal data on vulnerable SNAP recipients. Protecting privacy and security should be a priority.
I agree, the new data demands seem overly intrusive. States are right to resist this overreach and safeguard their citizens’ information.