Why SNAP soda and candy bans are controversial

Healthcare Why SNAP soda and candy bans are controversial Comments: by Tara Suter - 06/23/26 3:31 PM ET Comments: Link copied by Tara Suter - 06/23/26 3:31 PM ET Comments: Link copied

NOW PLAYING

A federal judge on Monday blocked bans, by the Trump administration and several states, on the use of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to buy soda, candy and other foods consider unhealthy.

Late last year, a push by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins urged states to strip some foods from the $100 billion federal program. The move came in tandem with Kennedy’s “Make America Healthy Again” agenda, and he has praised the move to restrict SNAP purchases.

Several states last year requested that the federal government allow them to go around U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) policy setting out what SNAP benefits can purchase, which the agency approved, according to a court filing. In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson rescinded those approvals.

In response to the ruling, Rollins said Tuesday in a post on the social platform X that “an activist judge just blocked our commonsense restriction on using SNAP benefits for soda and junk.”

“SNAP is for food — not sugar bombs fueling obesity, diabetes, and skyrocketing healthcare costs for low-income families.”

The moves have come in tandem with Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy’s “Make America Healthy Again” agenda, and Kennedy has praised the move to restrict SNAP purchases.

Despite a possible perceived health benefit in the restriction of certain foods and drink, there are some who disagree with the SNAP restrictions, citing reasons including discrimination and costs.

Here’s what you need to know about the controversy surrounding the SNAP restrictions:

Stigmatization

Some who are opposed to SNAP restrictions argue that they will raise the stigma around the SNAP program and result in increased discrimination against recipients.

“By reinforcing the narrative that SNAP participants can’t be trusted to make food choices for their families, I have no doubt that this discrimination will intensify,” Kate W. Bauer, a professor of nutritional sciences at the University of Michigan, wrote in an April article.

“This stigma harms both mental and physical health, adding another burden to those already struggling,” she added.

A piece titled “Let Them Eat Cake: Why We Must Oppose SNAP Food Choice Restrictions” in the Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law and Policy from April also argued that “singling out people who receive SNAP, policing their shopping carts, and delaying their purchases at the register” as a result of the restrictions would cause a reduction in those involved in the program.

The financials

Researchers have argued it would be expensive for the federal government to track all the hundreds of thousands of food and beverage products on the market plus the 20,000 introduced each year, according to economic policy researcher Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach’s 2017 testimony before the House Committee on Agriculture.

“Imposing new restrictions on SNAP would require expensive new infrastructure for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), grocery stores, and other retailers. Taxpayers would foot the bill to expand USDA’s capacity to patrol grocery transactions,” the Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law and Policy piece argued.

Health effects

In her 2017 congressional testimony, Schanzenbach also said that researchers have long argued that restrictions on SNAP are unlikely to change people’s eating patterns.

Bauer, the University of Michigan professor, wrote in her April piece that trials and “an increased understanding of individuals’ experience of food insecurity” demonstrate that SNAP restrictions would have the opposite of the desired effect by not promoting a healthful lifestyle and “would have unintended, negative consequences.”

“Specifically, randomized controlled trials that have tested the effects of different limitations or incentives on SNAP purchases demonstrate that, while soda purchases may decrease when SNAP benefits are restricted, there are no meaningful differences on individuals’ overall dietary intake,” she added.

Add as preferred source on Google Tags Brooke Rollins junk food Robert F. Kennedy Jr. SNAP SNAP waivers

Comments: Link copied