In Boston, two judges are poised to decide, possibly as early as Friday, whether the Trump administration must restore Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for November, despite the ongoing government shutdown.

The ruling is critical, as it affects the food purchasing power of approximately one in eight Americans.

Even if the court decides against halting SNAP benefits for the first time in the program’s 61-year history, many recipients might still experience delays in receiving funds on their debit cards. Reloading these cards typically takes one to two weeks, making it unlikely that recipients will see funds in the first days of November.

During a hearing in Boston on Thursday, involving a lawsuit filed by Democratic officials from 25 states, a federal judge expressed doubt about the administration’s stance on suspending SNAP benefits.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, appointed by former President Barack Obama, noted that if the government lacks funds, there is a formal procedure to address the shortfall rather than outright suspending benefits. “The process involves finding a fair way to reduce benefits,” Judge Talwani remarked.

Talwani seemed to be leaning toward requiring the government to put billions of dollars in emergency funds toward SNAP. That, she said, is her interpretation of what Congress intended when an agency’s funding runs out.

“If you don’t have money, you tighten your belt,” she said in court. “You are not going to make everyone drop dead because it’s a political game someplace.”

Government lawyers say a contingency fund containing some $5 billion cannot legally be used to maintain SNAP, a program that costs about $8 billion a month. The states say it must be used for that purpose and point to more money available in a second federal account with around $23 billion.

Talwani said her ruling would apply nationwide, not just in the states that are part of the challenge. That could defy the intentions of the U.S. Supreme Court, which has limited the use of nationwide injunctions, though it hasn’t prohibited them.

A hearing on a second, similar challenge filed by a coalition of cities and nonprofit organizations is scheduled before a Rhode Island-based federal judge for Friday.

Any ruling in either case is likely to face an appeal.

Meanwhile, states, food banks and recipients have been bracing for an abrupt shift in how low-income people can get groceries.

The majority of states have announced more or expedited funding for food banks or novel ways to load at least some benefits onto the debit cards used in the program.

Advocates and beneficiaries say halting the food aid would force people to choose between buying groceries and paying other bills.

At a Washington news conference Friday, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, whose department runs SNAP, said the contingency funds in question would not cover the cost of SNAP for long. Speaking at a press conference with House Speaker Mike Johnson at the Capitol, she blamed Democrats for conducting a “disgusting dereliction of duty” by refusing to end their Senate filibuster as they hold out for an extension of health care funds.

A push this week to continue SNAP funding during the shutdown failed in Congress.

To qualify for SNAP in 2025, a family of four’s net income after certain expenses can’t exceed the federal poverty line, which is about $31,000 per year. Last year, SNAP provided assistance to 41 million people, nearly two-thirds of whom were families with children, according to the lawsuit.