The Brief

A coalition of more than two dozen Democratic attorneys general and Democratic governors from three states are suing the Trump administration over its decision to suspend federal food benefits during the government shutdown.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts Tuesday, comes as the White House continues to blame Democrats for the termination of food benefits for low-income Americans during the government shutdown.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a mandatory entitlement program that provides about 1 in 8 U.S. residents an average of $187 a month in food aid. But the roughly $8 billion a month to fund SNAP benefits comes through annual congressional appropriations, which lapsed Oct. 1.

A new banner atop the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) website published Saturday says "the well has run dry" and that Senate Democrats are responsible for the department's decision not to send out benefits Nov. 1.

It's one of several politicized agency messages released during the shutdown in ways that experts say could be a violation of federal ethics laws.

A USDA memo provided to NPR by the federal agency stated that SNAP contingency funds "are only available to supplement regular monthly benefits when amounts have been appropriated for, but are insufficient to cover, benefits." Those contingency funds, which currently total just under $6 billion, are intended by law "for use only in such amounts and at such times as may become necessary to carry out program operations."

Friday's unsigned USDA memo argues that the contingency fund is not available to support FY 2026 regular benefits, because the appropriation for regular benefits no longer exists.

Yet details about the USDA's shutdown lapse plan posted on its website before Oct. 1 say "Congressional intent is evident that SNAP's operations should continue" in the case of a shutdown, citing the multi-year contingency funds that were created to help cover administrative expenses for states "to ensure that the state can also continue operations during a Federal Government shutdown."

"These multi-year contingency funds are also available to fund participant benefits in the event that a lapse occurs in the middle of the fiscal year," an explanation of the USDA shutdown plan continued.

That plan has since been removed from the USDA's website.

The White House did not respond to NPR's questions about why the lapse plan was removed from the USDA's website or the apparent change in SNAP funding guidance.

Funding decisions affect who does or does not receive benefits

Many budget experts disagree with the administration's explanation and tell NPR that SNAP funding is being used as a political cudgel in the ongoing shutdown.

"If you have an entitlement to something, and you have money that can fill that use, then you must fill that use," Bobby Kogan with the center-left Center for American Progress said.

"When they say 'Oh, no, it's not for benefits!' What do you think SNAP is? What do you think a program operation for SNAP is other than benefits?"

Kogan also points to the administration's transfer of $300 million to continue funding the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, also known as WIC, as a pathway to keep SNAP benefits going.

According to federal budget documents, the Trump administration transferred the $300 million for WIC from a state child nutrition programs account that is funded in part by customs duties collected the prior calendar year.

Those Section 32 funds are separate from the increased revenue generated from sweeping tariffs imposed by President Trump in recent months. That $23 billion is also a source that the administration says it won't tap for SNAP, arguing it would jeopardize money for school meals and infant formula.

The Trump administration has taken several steps throughout the shutdown to move money around to fund priorities, like a directive to pay active-duty military members using an unexpired defense research fund that some budget experts say violates spending laws.

A White House memo directed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to find money within the department's budget that had "a reasonable, logical relationship to the pay and allowances of military personnel, consistent with applicable law."

Devin O'Connor with the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities said that the USDA lapse plan and the way previous potential SNAP shortfalls were handled —including during Trump's first term — shows that the contingency fund accounts are supposed to be used for a case like this.

Still, O'Connor said the federal government and its programs are not designed to withstand a lapse in funding.

"When you shut down the government, bad things happen, and the longer the government is shut down, the more bad things will happen," he said. "And even with the Trump administration taking relatively aggressive actions to try to prevent certain harms over time, it's just going to grow and it's going to become more and more painful."

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Since 1977, Richard Santillan has been to every Opening Day game at Dodger Stadium. 

“The tradition goes from my father, to me, to my children and grandchildren. Some of my best memories are with my father and children here at Dodger Stadium,” Santillan told The LA Local, smiling under the shade of palm trees near the entrance to the ballpark Wednesday morning. He was there to protest the team less than 24 hours before Opening Day.

Santillan, like countless other loyal Dodgers fans, is grappling with his fan identity over the team’s decision to accept an invitation to the White House and owner Mark Walter’s ties to ICE detention facilities.

More than 30 people joined Santillan on Wednesday morning for a press conference held near 1000 Vin Scully Drive to convey a message directly to the team. 

“We are demanding the Dodgers stop participating in funding of inhumane treatment of families and do not go to the White House to celebrate with the criminal in chief,” Evelyn Escatiola told the crowd. “Together, we have the power to make a change.”

Escatiola, a former dean of East Los Angeles College and longtime community organizer, urged fans to flex their economic power by “letting the Dodgers know that we do not support repression.”

Jorge “Coqui” Rodriguez, a lifelong Dodgers fan, spoke to the crowd and called on Dodgers ownership to divest from immigration detention centers owned and operated by GEO Group and CoreCivic.

Jorge Coqui H Rodriguez speaks at a press conference outside Dodger Stadium on March 25, 2026, to demand the Dodgers not to visit the White House following their 2025 World Series win.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

In a phone interview a day before the protest, Rodriguez told The LA Local he did not want the Dodgers using his “cheve” or beer money to fund detention centers. 

“They can’t take our parking money, our cacahuate money, our cheve money, our Dodger Dog money and invest those funds into corporations that are imprisoning people. It’s wrong,” Rodriguez said. 

Rodriguez considers the Dodgers one of the most racially diverse teams and said the players need to support fans at a time when heightened immigration enforcement has become more common across L.A.

The team’s 2025’s visit to the White House drew ire from the largely Latino fan base, citing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on immigrants. 

In June, the team came under further scrutiny when rumors swirled online that federal immigration agents were using the stadium’s parking, which immigration authorities later denied in statements posted on social media accounts.

The team again came under fire after not releasing a statement on the impacts of ICE raids on its mostly Latino fan base at the height of immigration enforcement last summer. The team later agreed to invest $1 million to support families affected by immigration enforcement.

When he learned the Dodgers were pledging only $1 million to families in need, Rodriguez called the amount a  “slap in the face.” 

“These guys just bought the Lakers for billions of dollars and they give a million dollars to fight for legal services? That’s a joke,” Rodriguez said. “They need to have a moral backbone and not be investing in those companies.”

According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, former Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershawsaid last week that he is looking forward to the trip.

“I went when President [Joe] Biden was in office. I’m going to go when President [Donald] Trump is in office,” Kershaw said. “To me, it’s just about getting to go to the White House. You don’t get that opportunity every day, so I’m excited to go.”

The Dodgers have yet to announce when their planned visit will take place. 

Santillan sometimes laments his decision to give up his season tickets in protest of the team. His connection to the stadium and the memories he has made there with family and friends will last a lifetime, he said. On Thursday, he will uphold his tradition and be there for the first pitch of the season, but with a heavy heart.

“It’s a family tradition, but the Dodgers have a lot of work to do,” he said.

A local favorite mom-and-pop bookshop in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say theirs is just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.

Over the past 19 years, many in the neighborhood have come to love READ Books for its eclectic collection of used titles and shop dog Florence.

Co-owner Jeremy Kaplan said it’s been a delight to grow with the community over the years.

“Like seeing kids come back in, who were in grade school and now they’re in college,” Kaplan said.

But the building where Kaplan and wife Debbie rent was recently sold, and the rent increased by more than 130% to $2,805 a month, Kaplan said. He told LAist it was an increase his small business simply could not absorb.

Kaplan said he originally was given 30 days notice of the rent increase. After some research, assistance from Councilmember Ysabel Jurado’s office and some pro-bono legal help, Kaplan said he pushed back and got the 90-day notice he’s afforded by state law.

California Senate Bill 1103 requires landlords to give businesses with five or less employees 90 days’ notice for rent increases exceeding 10%, among other protections.

Systems Real Estate, the property management company, did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

What can small businesses do? 

Nadia Segura, directing attorney of the Small Business Program at pro bono legal aid non-profit Bet Tzedek said California law does not currently allow for rent control for commercial tenancies.

Outside of the protections under SB 1103, Segura said small businesses like READ Books don’t have much other recourse. And even then, commercial landlords are not required to inform their tenants of their protections under the law.

“There’s still a lot of people that don’t know about SB 1103. And then it’s very sad that they tell them they have these rent increases and within a month they have to leave,” Segura said.

She said her group is seeing steep rent hikes like this for commercial tenants across the city.

“We are seeing this even more with the World Cup coming up, the Olympics coming up. And I will say it was very sad to see that also after the wildfires,” Segura said.

Part of Bet Tzedek’s ongoing work is to advocate for small businesses, working with landlords who are increasing rents to see if they are willing to give business owners longer leases that lock in rents.

What’s next 

After READ Books posted about their situation on social media, commenters chimed in to express their outrage and love for the little shop.

While he looks for a new spot, Kaplan says he’s forming a coalition of local businesses and activist groups to see what can be done to help other small businesses facing similar displacement. He wants to address the displacement issue for businesses like his, which have made Eagle Rock the distinctive neighborhood that it is today.

Owl Talk, a longtime Eagle Rock staple selling clothing and accessories in a unit in the same building as READ Books, is facing a “more than double” rent increase, according to a post on their Instagram account.

Kaplan said he’s been in touch with the office of state Assemblywoman Jessica Caloza and wants to explore the possibility of introducing legislation to set up protections for small businesses like his, including rent-control measures or a vacancy tax for landlords. Kaplan said he also reached out to the office of state Sen. Maria Durazo.

By his count, Kaplan said there are about a dozen businesses within surrounding blocks that are at risk of closing their doors or have shuttered due to rent increases or other struggles.

When READ Books was founded during the Great Recession, Kaplan said he knew it was a longshot to open a bookstore at the same time so many were struggling to stay in business.

“It was kind of interesting to be doing something that neighborhoods needed. That was important to me growing up, that was important to my children, that was important to my wife growing up,” Kaplan said.

“And then somebody comes in and says, ‘We’re gonna over double your rent.”

Topline:

Frozen budget: Most of the city’s Bureau of Street Lighting budget comes from an assessment that people who own property illuminated by lights pay on their county property tax bill. The amount people pay depends on the kind of property they own and how much they benefit from lighting. A typical single-family home currently pays $53 annually, and in total, the assessments bring in about $45 million annually for the city to repair and maintain streetlights. Changing the amount the Bureau of Street Lighting gets from the assessment requires a vote among property owners who benefit from the lights.

Ballots: L.A. City Council’s vote gives city staff the green light to prepare and send out those ballots. Miguel Sangalang, who oversees the bureau, said at a committee meeting earlier this month that he expects to send out ballots by April 17. Notices about the ballots will be sent out prior to the ballots themselves.

Near unanimous vote: L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was the only “No” vote Tuesday, saying she wanted to see a more current strategic plan for the bureau. Sangalang said the bureau developed a plan in 2022 that lays out how money will be spent. Councilmember Imelda Padilla was absent for the vote.

Vote count: Votes will be weighted according to the assessment amount. Basically, the more you’re asked to pay yearly to maintain streetlights, the more your vote will count. Ballots received before June 2 will be tabulated by the L.A. City Clerk.

How much more money: According to a report, the amount needed in assessments from property owners to meet the repair and maintenance needs of the city’s streetlighting in the next fiscal year is nearly $112 million.

Use of the money: Sangalang said at a March 11 committee meeting that the extra funds would be used to double the number of staff to handle repairs and procure solar streetlights, which don’t face the threat of copper wire theft. That would all potentially reduce the time it takes to repair simple fixes down to a week. Currently, city residents wait for months to see broken streetlights repaired. The assessment would come with a three-year auditing mechanism.