Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nevilledog

(54,694 posts)
Fri Nov 7, 2025, 10:41 PM Friday

Steve Vladeck explains Jackson's temporary stay on the SNAP case

https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/190-snap-wtf

I wanted to put out a very brief post to try to provide a bit of context for Justice Jackson’s single-justice order, handed down shortly after 9 p.m. ET on Friday night, that imposed an “administrative stay” of a district court order that would’ve required the Trump administration to use various contingency funds to pay out critical benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

It may surprise folks that Justice Jackson, who has been one of the most vocal critics of the Court’s behavior on emergency applications from the Trump administration, acquiesced in even a temporary pause of the district court’s ruling in this case. But as I read the order, which says a lot more than a typical “administrative stay” from the Court, Jackson was stuck between a rock and a hard place—given the incredibly compressed timing that was created by the circumstances of the case.

In a world in which Justice Jackson either knew or suspected that at least five of the justices would grant temporary relief to the Trump administration if she didn’t, the way she structured the stay means that she was able to try to control timing of the Supreme Court’s (forthcoming) review—and to create pressure for it to happen faster than it otherwise might have. In other words, it’s a compromise—one with which not everyone will agree, but which strikes me as eminently defensible under these unique (and, let’s be clear, maddening and entirely f-ing avoidable) circumstances.

I. How We Got Here

Everyone agrees that, among the many increasingly painful results of the government shutdown, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) can no longer spend the funds Congress appropriated to cover SNAP—a program that helps to fund food purchases for one in eight (42 million!) Americans. Everyone also agrees that there are other sources of appropriated money that the President has the statutory authority to rely upon to at least partially fund SNAP benefits for the month of November. The two questions that have provoked the most legal debate is whether (1) he has the authority to fully fund SNAP; and (2) either way, whether federal courts can order him to use whatever authorities he has.

*snip*
35 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Steve Vladeck explains Jackson's temporary stay on the SNAP case (Original Post) Nevilledog Friday OP
Thanks for sharing. yellow dahlia Friday #1
TY! Cha Friday #2
Good explanation, which is found later in the piece: SunSeeker Friday #3
Recommended. H2O Man Friday #4
People assumed that once Jackson removed the stay gab13by13 Friday #5
Justice Jackson H2O Man Saturday #12
MOST people are not so aware (including, surprisingly, DUers.) elleng Friday #6
That's true. H2O Man Saturday #13
Quite right, and my 2 daughters are generally aware of some of it, elleng Saturday #15
Yeah orangecrush Saturday #9
I recognize that H2O Man Saturday #11
Shit is already blowing everywhere. yardwork Saturday #21
You are correct orangecrush Saturday #22
Thank you so much for this post. yardwork Saturday #25
Your understanding is deeply appreciated. orangecrush Saturday #33
I apologize too. BlueKota Saturday #34
legalese is hard for most people to read Skittles Saturday #14
Same orangecrush Saturday #23
I am so discouraged by the attacks on Jackson in the other thread. yardwork Saturday #20
I can't speak for anyone else, and I know I was BlueKota Saturday #35
Babies starve angrychair Friday #7
FUCK AN EXPLANATION orangecrush Saturday #8
There's a lot going on that is beyond explanation. yardwork Saturday #24
Short-sighted, emotional responses like that is why "their kids can't eat" to begin with. W_HAMILTON Saturday #26
THIS. yardwork Saturday #32
Thank you for posting this LetMyPeopleVote Saturday #10
K & R chia Saturday #16
Thank you for posting canetoad Saturday #17
any children that are hungry can derive nourishment from this brilliant legal move worthy of Mighty Merrick Garland thebigidea Saturday #18
Your knee jerk reflexes are working well. Here's the important part - RandomNumbers Saturday #19
This is not at all like Merrick. It's the opposite. yardwork Saturday #29
As one still waiting for SNAP, I completely understand mvd Saturday #27
I'm so sorry this is happening to you. yardwork Saturday #30
Thank you mvd Saturday #31
K&R spanone Saturday #28

SunSeeker

(57,216 posts)
3. Good explanation, which is found later in the piece:
Fri Nov 7, 2025, 11:15 PM
Friday
All emergency applications are filed in the first instance with the “Circuit Justice” assigned to that particular court of appeals/geographic area. For the Boston-based First Circuit, that’s Justice Jackson. And with one equivocal exception, every “administrative” stay of which I’m aware has come from the Circuit Justice, not the full Court. Thus, the onus was on Justice Jackson to either enter the administrative stay herself, or risk being overruled by the full Court.
...
As for why Justice Jackson did it, to me, the clue is the last sentence. Had Jackson refused to issue an administrative stay, it’s entirely possible (indeed, she may already have known) that a majority of her colleagues were ready to do it themselves. I still think that this is what happened back in April when the full Court intervened shortly before 1 a.m., without explaining why Justice Alito hadn’t, in the A.A.R.P. Alien Enemies Act case. And from Jackson’s perspective, an administrative stay from the full Court would’ve been worse—almost certainly because it would have been open-ended (that is, it would not have had a deadline). The upshot would’ve been that Judge McConnell’s order could’ve remained frozen indefinitely while the full Court took its time. Yesterday’s grant of a stay in Trump v. Orr, for instance, came 48 days after the Justice Department first sought emergency relief.

Instead, by keeping the case for herself and granting the same relief, in contrast, Justice Jackson was able to directly influence the timing in both the First Circuit and the Supreme Court, at least for now. She nudged the First Circuit (which I expect to rule by the end of the weekend, Monday at the latest); and, assuming that court rules against the Trump administration, she also tied her colleagues’ hands—by having her administrative stay expire 48 hours after the First Circuit rules. Of course, the full Court can extend the administrative stay (and Jackson can do it herself). But this way, at least, she’s putting pressure on everyone—the First Circuit and the full Court—to move very quickly in deciding whether or not Judge McConnell’s orders should be allowed to go into effect. From where I’m sitting, that’s why Justice Jackson, the most vocal critic among the justices of the Court’s behavior in Trump-related emergency applications, ruled herself here—rather than allowing the full Court to overrule her. It drastically increases the odds of the full Supreme Court resolving this issue by the end of next week—one way or the other.


https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/190-snap-wtf

H2O Man

(78,253 posts)
4. Recommended.
Fri Nov 7, 2025, 11:17 PM
Friday

In my opinion, not many people are aware of how federal courts work. The response on other posts to this stay reinforce that.

gab13by13

(30,629 posts)
5. People assumed that once Jackson removed the stay
Fri Nov 7, 2025, 11:23 PM
Friday

it would have been over, which was not true. Krasnov would have appealed the decision be made by the entire SC.

Justice Jackson did just as I guessed, she chose the best and quickest way to end the stay.

H2O Man

(78,253 posts)
12. Justice Jackson
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 12:47 AM
Saturday

is as intelligent as anyone who has sat on the USSC. She is a good and decent human being. She is not going to betray people. There are others on the court who are vile, disgusting human beings. People should know the distinction.

H2O Man

(78,253 posts)
13. That's true.
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 12:57 AM
Saturday

My children have often told me that no one is interested in the things that I fine fascinating. Yet, that is 99% true, at most. There are others who have an equal interest in all three branches of the federal government. (grin)

These days, all four adult children think it odd that I spend hours each day watching educational programs about each branch. There are pod casts that feature outstanding federal lawyers providing fascinating information on the federal court system. In the past, I was involved in an environmental case in federal court. Working at the county mental health clinic, I sat in on two DOJ investigators grilling one of my clients. One of my nephews is married to an attorney that practices in federal court. It's an impressive, at times imperfect system that the public should be familiar with.

elleng

(141,524 posts)
15. Quite right, and my 2 daughters are generally aware of some of it,
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 01:24 AM
Saturday

as am I, their deceased father, grandfather, my deceased cousin, are attorneys, as is my quite alive brother (thank goodness!) It's a famiy thing, for which I am thankful!

H2O Man

(78,253 posts)
11. I recognize that
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 12:42 AM
Saturday

not everyone is as interested in the federal court system -- or are retired and can enjoy watching pod casts etc all day -- like myself. But rather than become furious without understanding not only "what" happened, but much more importantly, "why" it happened, would seem a meaningless misuse of outrage ...... when there are so many valid reasons to be furious and outraged.

yardwork

(68,551 posts)
21. Shit is already blowing everywhere.
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 08:43 AM
Saturday

I think it's possible that you don't understand how far things have already gone to hell.

There are no easy solutions now. None.

Jackson is doing what she can. She is outvoted. Why are you assuming the worst of a highly accomplished Justice who has never once faltered from doing what she can to support our democracy?

BlueKota

(4,883 posts)
34. I apologize too.
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 09:33 AM
Saturday

I should know better than to respond emotionally rather than rationally. I was taught better than that.

I get triggered when bullies seem to get away with the vilest behavior, and there seems to be nothing anyone can do to stop it. Yes we were hoping that their party's multiple defeats at the polls, would cause at least some Republican members of the House and Senate, to rethink their blind allegiance to tsf, but they're still marching to his tune, by refusing any compromise to reopen the government.

I know we have a chance at changing that a year from now, but there's a whole lot more damage he can do in that time. I know that's reality, I just can't get the emotional side of my brain, to be okay with the fact that he is being allowed to hurt so many people without being held accountable or facing consequences for it.

Skittles

(168,613 posts)
14. legalese is hard for most people to read
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 01:21 AM
Saturday

I appreciate the interpretations provided by legal eagles on DU

orangecrush

(27,543 posts)
23. Same
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 08:46 AM
Saturday

I was beyond reason yesterday.

I only hope our elected Democrats get just as angry, in a more effective way

yardwork

(68,551 posts)
20. I am so discouraged by the attacks on Jackson in the other thread.
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 08:37 AM
Saturday

It's very disappointing how many DUers leaped to instantaneous anger and blame without having a clue.

I can't help but feel that some folks were so quick to attack her because she's a Black woman. They probably don't think of themselves as biased but when the chips are down some people are very quick to assume the worst.

BlueKota

(4,883 posts)
35. I can't speak for anyone else, and I know I was
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 10:10 AM
Saturday

wrong now to blame Justice Jackson. This doesn't excuse letting my emotions take over. I can only say for me it was a knee jerk furious emotional reaction that once again a bully wasn't able to be stopped. That's on me though because I still have issues with why my parents left me in that horrible Catholic School, even knowing how much emotional damage it was doing to me, and that my former boss was unqualified for his job, hated women because of his ex wife, and did virtually no work, but in the end, he won because he was a Republican male in a county ruled mostly by Republican males who almost always stick up for each other, even when they're wrong.

Realistically I know life isn't ever going to be truly fair, but again I don't know how to stop being emotionally triggered by that. Prayers and years of therapy, and people telling me I just have to accept that, hasn't stopped the sadness and anger that people who have done nothing wrong, get hurt, and the ones who hurt people on are too often never held accountable.

angrychair

(11,468 posts)
7. Babies starve
Fri Nov 7, 2025, 11:42 PM
Friday

Rich people eat. Not complicated. No one on SCOTUS is going to go to bed hungry this weekend.

yardwork

(68,551 posts)
24. There's a lot going on that is beyond explanation.
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 08:47 AM
Saturday

Explain why so many Democrats "couldn't bring themselves" to vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016, allowing Trump to put THREE corrupt judges on the Supreme Court?

Adding to the corrupt judges already appointed by W, that gives the court a 6-3 conservative majority. And those 6 aren't just conservative - they're corrupt.

So here we are. Didn't happen last night. Happened on Election Day 2016.

W_HAMILTON

(9,863 posts)
26. Short-sighted, emotional responses like that is why "their kids can't eat" to begin with.
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 08:49 AM
Saturday

The road to how we ended up here was a long one that was paved with *just enough* people at many steps along the route making short-sighted electoral decisions that maybe made them feel good in the moment but now are leading to kids not being able to eat.

Everyone was adequately warned.

yardwork

(68,551 posts)
32. THIS.
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 09:00 AM
Saturday

And it's very likely that Trump will get to appoint more utterly corrupt justices to this Court over the next 3.5 years.

thebigidea

(13,542 posts)
18. any children that are hungry can derive nourishment from this brilliant legal move worthy of Mighty Merrick Garland
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 05:06 AM
Saturday

RandomNumbers

(18,986 posts)
19. Your knee jerk reflexes are working well. Here's the important part -
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 08:33 AM
Saturday

(from the link in the OP)

In an order circulated to the Court’s press corps at 9:17 p.m. ET, Jackson issued the administrative stay sought by the Trump administration. But her order says a lot more than the typical administrative stay—which usually contains nothing other than boilerplate. As Jackson wrote, “Given the First Circuit’s representations, an administrative stay is required to facilitate the First Circuit’s expeditious resolution of the pending stay motion.” Thus, she stayed the two orders from Judge McConnell “pending disposition of the motion for a stay pending appeal” in the First Circuit, “or further order of Justice Jackson or of the Court.” And as the order concludes, “This administrative stay will terminate forty-eight hours after the First Circuit’s resolution of the pending motion, which the First Circuit is expected to issue with dispatch.”

The first thing to say about this order is that I’ve never seen anything quite like it before. Circuit Justices don’t usually explain administrative stays, and certainly not with this much detail about the timing. Here, Justice Jackson is clearly telling the First Circuit to hustle—a message I am sure the court of appeals will receive and act upon.

As for why Justice Jackson did it, to me, the clue is the last sentence. Had Jackson refused to issue an administrative stay, it’s entirely possible (indeed, she may already have known) that a majority of her colleagues were ready to do it themselves. I still think that this is what happened back in April when the full Court intervened shortly before 1 a.m., without explaining why Justice Alito hadn’t, in the A.A.R.P. Alien Enemies Act case. And from Jackson’s perspective, an administrative stay from the full Court would’ve been worse—almost certainly because it would have been open-ended (that is, it would not have had a deadline). The upshot would’ve been that Judge McConnell’s order could’ve remained frozen indefinitely while the full Court took its time. Yesterday’s grant of a stay in Trump v. Orr, for instance, came 48 days after the Justice Department first sought emergency relief.

Instead, by keeping the case for herself and granting the same relief, in contrast, Justice Jackson was able to directly influence the timing in both the First Circuit and the Supreme Court, at least for now. She nudged the First Circuit (which I expect to rule by the end of the weekend, Monday at the latest); and, assuming that court rules against the Trump administration, she also tied her colleagues’ hands—by having her administrative stay expire 48 hours after the First Circuit rules. Of course, the full Court can extend the administrative stay (and Jackson can do it herself). But this way, at least, she’s putting pressure on everyone—the First Circuit and the full Court—to move very quickly in deciding whether or not Judge McConnell’s orders should be allowed to go into effect. From where I’m sitting, that’s why Justice Jackson, the most vocal critic among the justices of the Court’s behavior in Trump-related emergency applications, ruled herself here—rather than allowing the full Court to overrule her. It drastically increases the odds of the full Supreme Court resolving this issue by the end of next week—one way or the other.


Point being, - kids may be hungry next week, but instead of being hungry indefinitely while the the Trump SC dawdles, there will be a decision much more quickly, with a good chance of it going to get the kids fed.

That said, if you aren't starving yourself and haven't donated to a food bank yet - please do that.

KBJ is not the problem here. The problem is the EVIL that is currently running this country.

yardwork

(68,551 posts)
29. This is not at all like Merrick. It's the opposite.
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 08:51 AM
Saturday

Become informed before you accuse the only Black female Supreme Court Justice of being uncaring, corrupt, or foolish.

It's not a good look.

mvd

(65,788 posts)
27. As one still waiting for SNAP, I completely understand
Sat Nov 8, 2025, 08:50 AM
Saturday

Of course I wanted it to be different, but this is a hostile Court she is dealing with.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Steve Vladeck explains Ja...