Denver guy
LightNews LightNews
denver-guy.bsky.social
Denver guy
@denver-guy.bsky.social
79 followers 550 following 91 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
denver-guy.bsky.social
I like the zombie in the back checking her phone. Great shot!!
November 10, 2025 at 4:41 PM
denver-guy.bsky.social
bsky.app/profile/juli...
juliedicaro.bsky.social Julie DiCaro @juliedicaro.bsky.social · 21h
NEW: The Plaintiffs (26 states) in the Boston SNAP case have filed a brief and a letter as amici curiae in the RI SNAP case, advising the 1st Circuit that the USDA left pertinent facts out of its Emergency Petition to SCOTUS.
www.courtlistener.com/docket/71783...
States have obtained additional information regarding the precarious circumstances created by the federal defendants—who moved for a stay of the District of Rhode Island’s temporary restraining orders after States had begun the process of facilitating full benefits for November, and despite the USDA expressly assuring the States that it was in the process of implementing full benefits. The States filed an action in the District of Massachusetts to challenge the same withholding of SNAP benefits at issue in this appeal. Like the Plaintiffs here, the States have experienced the significant confusion the federal government has created around the payment of SNAP benefits—first agreeing to provide partial benefits, then filing a motion to stay in the First Circuit, then informing States that it would provide full benefits, and then filing a motion to stay in the Supreme Court. The States write here to apprise the court of significant developments affecting their agencies and relevant to the Court’s resolution of the defendants’ motion for a stay pending appeal. Yesterday, on November 7, USDA notified the States that it was implementing full SNAP benefits for November, and would “complete the processes necessary to make funds available.” SeeEx. A attached hereto; see also Massachusetts v. USDA, No. 1:25-CV-13165-IT (D. Mass. Oct. 29, 2025), Dkt. No. 75. USDA’s notice made no reference whatsoever either to its appeal of the District of Rhode Island’s temporary restraining orders or to its motion to stay those orders pending appeal. See Ex. A attached hereto. USDA’s assurances regarding its ongoing implementation of full benefits were likewise represented in follow-up oral conversations between at least one state agency and USDA’s Food and Nutrition Services (“FNS”). The federal defendants did not advise the Supreme Court of these facts in their emergency petition submitted in the evening of November 7, 2025. See App. No. 25A539 (U.S. Nov. 7, 2025).
November 9, 2025 at 11:08 PM