by 
Michigan joins 20-state coalition to stop Trump administration’s demand for sensitive food aid data in effort seen as politically driven.
USDA data demand sparks legal challenge over SNAP data privacy protections
LANSING, Mich. — Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel and a coalition of 20 other attorneys general filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday challenging what they call an illegal attempt by the Trump Administration to collect massive amounts of sensitive personal data from state food stamp data assistance programs.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, seeks to block the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) May 2025 mandate that states turn over five years of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program SNAP recipient data—including personally identifiable information PII (Social Security numbers and home addresses.) The USDA has suggested that states risk losing administrative funding if they refuse to comply.
Nessel called the demand “an unlawful exploitation” of SNAP, a program Michigan uses to distribute $254 million per month in benefits to around 1.4 million residents. “This is yet another attempt by the Trump Administration to illegally use personal, sensitive data to fuel the president’s political agenda,” she said in a statement released with the suit.
Federal data request raises legal alarms over privacy and constitutional authority
The USDA’s request, issued without a public comment period or Congressional oversight, would override decades of established privacy law, according to the multi-state complaint. Federal statutes bar states from sharing personally identifiable data about SNAP recipients unless directly tied to the program’s administration—a threshold the states argue has not been met.
“USDA’s actions not only violate federal law and the U.S. Constitution, they threaten to unravel the critical trust that supports our safety net programs,” said Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, who also joined the suit.
Legal scholars note the case hinges on constitutional limits of federal power and statutory interpretations of the Privacy Act and SNAP authorization laws. “This is not just about food aid—it’s about whether federal agencies can coerce states into becoming surveillance arms of the federal government,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a constitutional law professor at the University of Texas School of Law (Vladeck, 2025).
Immigration enforcement data trail raises red flags for states
State officials allege the USDA’s push is part of a broader strategy by the Trump administration to assemble vast databases of personal information across federal agencies. Public reporting indicates that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has already secured medical and income data from both the IRS and Department of Health and Human Services for use in immigration enforcement.
In past months, Nessel has filed separate legal challenges over similar data transfers involving Medicaid recipients, arguing they violate medical privacy protections.
The current SNAP-related lawsuit claims these overlapping data grabs reflect a “coordinated effort” by the federal government to weaponize personal information for deportation and political purposes. The coalition argues the USDA lacks both statutory authority and a legitimate public interest to demand SNAP data under the guise of fraud prevention.
Even the USDA itself has previously described SNAP as having “one of the most rigorous quality control systems in the federal government,” undercutting the agency’s current justification for the data request.
Michigan’s role in legal fight emphasizes states’ rights and food security
For Michigan, the lawsuit marks a sharp rejection of federal overreach and a defense of both personal privacy and economic stability for low-income families. Any disruption in the state’s monthly distribution of over $250 million in food assistance could have a ripple effect on food insecurity, retail economics, and public health.
“Michigan families deserve to have their personal information protected, and I will keep fighting until they receive exactly that,” Nessel said.
The Snap Data Privacy coalition, which includes states from across the political spectrum such as California, Colorado, New York, Oregon, and Wisconsin, seeks an injunction preventing the USDA from conditioning funding on compliance with the data demand. The suit also requests a declaratory ruling that USDA’s actions are illegal under the Spending Clause of the Constitution and multiple federal privacy statutes.
The District Court’s decision could set a precedent for future federal-state data sharing and the extent to which federal agencies can compel states to disclose personal information beyond their constitutional boundaries.
Read More Interesting Feature Stories From ThumbWind
- Michigan Feature News Stories – Unveiling the diverse and vibrant people, captivating places, and remarkable events that come together to make the Great Lake State unique.
- Strange Political News – A sarcastic take on official news from around the U.S., exploring the absurdities that often arise in the political landscape while providing a humorous perspective on current events and highlighting the quirks of politicians and policies.
- Michigan Hometown News – News and events from Michigan’s Upper Thumb region worth knowing, including local stories, impactful interviews, and updates on community happenings that shape the culture and lifestyle of the area.
Your Turn – Like This, or Hate it – We Want To Hear From You
Please offer an insightful and thoughtful comment. We review each response. Follow us to have other feature stories fill up your email box, or check us out at ThumbWind News.
