Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson on Friday night temporarily paused a lower court ruling that required the Trump administration to fully fund the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) for November by midnight.

Jackson’s brief order keeps the lower court’s mandate on hold until the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issues its own judgment. She did not refer the matter to the full Supreme Court.

The ruling came hours after the appeals court denied the administration’s request for an emergency stay. The administration then appealed directly to the Supreme Court, warning that compliance would force the government to transfer an estimated $4 billion by the end of the day.

As the legal wrangling unfolded Friday, at least nine states had already begun distributing SNAP benefits under guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which oversees the program. In a letter to state agencies, USDA officials said they were “working toward paying full November SNAP benefits” and expected to make funds available later in the day.

The case stems from U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr.’s Thursday order directing the administration to immediately release full funding for SNAP during the ongoing government shutdown. The administration had said it planned to issue only partial payments, reserving remaining funds for the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) nutrition program.

At the center of the dispute is whether the federal government can be compelled to use $4 billion from Section 32 of the 1935 Agricultural Adjustment Act to finance SNAP benefits for November.

Solicitor General John Sauer, in an emergency filing to the Supreme Court, said the order posed “imminent, irreparable harms” and requested an immediate stay, warning that the transfer “must occur by tonight.”

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi criticized the appeals court’s earlier refusal to block the order, calling it “judicial activism at its worst.”

“A single district court in Rhode Island should not be able to dictate how scarce federal funds are spent in the middle of a shutdown,” Bondi wrote on social media.

The administration argues that diverting Section 32 funds would jeopardize WIC operations, likening it to “robbing Peter to pay Paul.” It warned that allowing courts to reallocate mandatory spending could turn the federal budget “into a giant shell game.”

Plaintiffs — a coalition of local governments and nonprofit organizations — countered that the government has the authority and obligation to ensure that millions of Americans relying on SNAP are not left without food assistance.