Delaware Attorney General Kathy Jennings helps block a Trump Administration attempt to defund and collect personal data from Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program applicants and recipients.
A U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California decision blocked a demand from the administration that states turn over personal and sensitive information from those who either received or applied for SNAP benefits.
Jennings joined other states in filing a lawsuit earlier this year against the Trump Administration alleging the demand violates federal law.
The court determined the demand was unlikely unlawful because the administration stated it would disclose and use the data for actions unrelated to federal benefits programs - and granted a preliminary junction.
The states returned to court after the Trump Administration threatened to cut off funding to states that didn’t turn over data using a security protocol proposed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
According to the District Court, the USDA can’t collect states’ records without an agreed-upon protocol, and the USDA’s proposed protocol was rejected by states, which argued the USDA intended to share the states’ data in actions unrelated to administering federal benefits programs.
“Yet again, a court has affirmed that the Trump Administration’s attempts to take something that doesn’t belong to them are illegal,” said Jennings. “As long as they keep trying, I’m going to do everything in my power to ensure that this lawless Administration doesn’t get its hands on your personal data.”
When SNAP applicants provide private information, federal law provides that their information will not be used or shared for unrelated purposes.
The Trump Administration has allegedly repeatedly threatened to withhold funding if the states failed to comply with sharing data.
Meanwhile, Jennings joins Attorneys General for New Jersey and New York to intervene in a federal lawsuit to prevent guns from being mailed with very few limits.
The states intervened to defend a federal firearms law Congress passed in 1927 that bars the U.S. Postal Service from mailing certain concealable firearms.
That statute was challenged last year in a federal court in Pennsylvania, and in January, the U.S. Department of Justice stated it will no longer enforce the statute and instructed the USPS to issue conforming regulations.
“If you needed any more confirmation that this Administration is bought and paid for by the gun lobby, look no further,” said Jennings. “There is no good reason – none – to do away with a nearly century-old common-sense gun safety measure like this one. If the White House isn’t going to step up to keep this law in place, then we will.”
The states are filing an intervention motion asking the court to allow them to step in and a summary judgment motion explaining why the statute is constitutional.
They argue if this statute was struck down it would risk allowing those prohibited from owning firearms to get a gun through the mail, and they could also get weapons illegal to possess in their states.
That’s because the USPS has no obligation to ensure the packages it carries complies with state laws, creating those loopholes.
The states are also filing a brief explaining why the federal law comports with the Second Amendment.
The motions were filed in the U.S. District Court of the Western District of Pennsylvania.
