The Legal Aid Society and Freshfields US LLP on Tuesday filed a federal appeal on behalf of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients whose food benefits were stolen through widespread electronic benefit transfer (EBT) card skimming scams. The appeal asks the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to overturn a lower court ruling that allowed the federal government to deny replacement of stolen benefits to low-income families.
The case highlights a growing crisis affecting SNAP recipients in New York and across the country, where scammers have used skimming devices and other electronic methods to steal food assistance funds. Many households have lost hundreds or even thousands of dollars in benefits, leaving families without resources to buy groceries and forcing difficult choices between food and other essential expenses.
Despite increasing reports of cyber theft targeting SNAP users, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and its Food and Nutrition Service have continued to enforce regulations and policies that prevent states from replacing stolen benefits using federal funds. Advocates argue that these rules fail to reflect the realities of modern electronic theft and leave vulnerable households without meaningful protection.
“SNAP is a lifeline and these benefits are often a family’s only means to put food on the table,” said Edward Josephson, supervising attorney in the Civil Law Reform Unit of The Legal Aid Society. “The law requires USDA to protect recipients when benefits are stolen beyond their control. This appeal seeks to ensure that the agency follows the law and that vulnerable families are made whole.”
The appeal challenges two specific USDA actions. First, it argues that a federal regulation adopted in 2010 governing SNAP benefit replacement violates federal law because it does not offer protections comparable to the former paper-coupon system, which allowed recipients to recover stolen benefits when losses occurred through no fault of their own. The filing also contends that federal officials failed to adequately consider the well-documented risks of electronic theft when creating the regulation.
Second, the appeal challenges a more recent USDA policy that explicitly bars states from replacing benefits stolen through skimming. Plaintiffs argue that this policy contradicts congressional intent and unfairly shifts the burden of cybercrime onto low-income families who rely on SNAP to meet basic food needs.
Through the appeal, the plaintiffs are asking the court to reverse the lower court’s decision, invalidate the challenged regulation and policy and require the USDA to allow replacement of stolen benefits, including those taken from families involved in the case.
SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, serves more than 40 million people nationwide and remains one of the country’s largest anti-hunger programs. As electronic theft continues to increase, advocates say restoring stronger replacement protections is essential to ensuring the program can effectively support low-income households and maintain access to reliable food assistance.
