The definition of food is up for debate.
What’s happening: A federal judge blocked SNAP restrictions in five states after recipients sued the USDA, arguing it overstepped its authority by approving waivers banning soda, candy, and more.
Snap decision. A key MAHA initiative to prohibit the purchase of junk food with federal assistance dollars, the USDA allowed 23 states to establish their own SNAP restrictions.
A Washington DC judge ruled that West Virginia, Iowa, Tennessee, Colorado, and Nebraska failed to provide required notice for projects with “significant impact to the public,” and the USDA lacked authority to redefine what qualifies as food through waiver programs.
Indigestion. Prioritizing real food could improve public health and align incentives in a broken food system, but fast-tracking infrastructure changes for food insecure populations requires clear legal authority and consistent standards.
While the government set forth more straightforward dietary guidelines, the FDA has yet to draft its definition of UPFs, leaving policy and enforcement up to interpretation.
Looking ahead: A delay at most, revised waivers are likely to follow. But, with SNAP recipients choosing just as poorly as non-users, regulation may require fixing the food system — not just restricting purchases at checkout.
