Oregon and New York are leading a new lawsuit alongside 20 other states, arguing the Trump administration violated the law when it attempted to pull food assistance benefits from immigrants with lawful resident status in the United States.

A complaint filed in the US District Court of Oregon in Eugene on November 26 said US Department of Agriculture (USDA) guidance issued October 31 was unlawful because it failed to recognize legal exceptions that allow lawful residents to receive benefits while in the middle of their legal process.

The lawsuit challenges USDA guidance that removed Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits from refugees and asylum seekers earlier this month despite their eligibility under US law.

In a virtual press conference Wednesday, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield said the coalition of AGs sent a letter November 19 seeking to clarify the guidance before filing the lawsuit, saying they sincerely believed it could have been a mistake. But a reply never came.

“It’s that simple,” Rayfield said. “If you’re an asylum seeker, if you’re here as a refugee, if you’re here as a lawful resident, if you’re here in the United States because of a humanitarian purpose, we should never yank people’s food benefits away under these circumstances.”

The attorneys general are requesting a preliminary injunction barring the USDA from implementing the guidance. Rayfield said he hopes the court will agree before Thursday.

On July 4, Congress passed HR1—also called the “One Big Beautiful Bill”—which among other things, narrowed the categories for non-citizen SNAP eligibility. It also continued an ongoing practice in which lawful permanent residents, known as Green Card holders, were subject to a five-year waiting period. 

But the law also has exceptions to the waiting period, allowing legal residents to receive benefits under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act (PRWOA) while seeking to adjust their status. The new USDA guidance would illegally remove eligibility under PRWOA, according to the complaint.

That meant tens of thousands of legal residents faced the threat of becoming ineligible for SNAP benefits despite their eligibility.

Rayfield said Oregon is still working through data to see how many people would be affected, but said it could be up to 3,000 people. The Oregon Department of Human Services was unable to provide more specific numbers at the time of publishing.

While the lawsuit centers around the loss of benefits for legal residents, states that issued payments despite the new guidance could also face significant new penalties due to HR1, according to the complaint. It said if benefit levels remained consistent in New York, the state could potentially end up paying between $367 million and $1.2 billion in extra costs—regardless of whether the state was responsible for the error.

“It’s wild, and absolutely stupid that we have to be here today, the day before Thanksgiving.”—Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield

The lawsuit names USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins and the USDA as defendants. A USDA spokesperson declined to comment on the Mercury’s question asking how the lawsuit will impact SNAP payments in the short term, instead referring the question to the US Department of Justice.

“We will not comment on pending litigation,” the spokesperson said. 

A US DOJ spokesperson declined to answer the same question.

The new USDA guidance also got rid of a 120-day notice period states typically have to avoid penalties for errors, according to the complaint. When agencies issue new guidance, states often see an uptick in errors, which can come with federal consequences. But the complaint says the USDA did not give sufficient notice to states in a September 4 memo outlining new changes to the programs. While much of the memo described the new provisions in detail, the section around legal residents was scarce, which could lead to inadvertent errors, according to the complaint.

Still, attorneys general remained focused on efforts to restart payments as soon as possible, noting that many are beginning to celebrate a holiday weekend.

“This guidance looks like someone took notes from the Grinch, taking food from families right as the holidays arrive,” California AG Rob Bonta said.

Rayfield agreed.

“It’s wild, and absolutely stupid that we have to be here today, the day before Thanksgiving,” Rayfield said.

Other jurisdictions joining in the lawsuit are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawai‘i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.

The latest lawsuit isn't the first time Rayfield has sued the Trump administration over SNAP benefits. On October 31, a court in Massachusetts ordered the federal government to ensure at least partial access to SNAP benefits during the prolonged government shutdown. Oregon was part of the multi-state lawsuit that prompted the ruling.