Legal Aid Society
hamburger

News

LAS Sues Over Delays to Expedited SNAP and Cash Assistance Benefits

The Legal Aid Society, National Center For Law And Economic Justice, Northern Manhattan Improvement Corporation (NMIC), and New York Legal Assistance Group today filed a motion against the City of New York and its public benefits issuing agency, the New York City Human Resources Administration (HRA), for failing to provide emergency expedited food and cash assistance benefits to extremely vulnerable families, as required by federal and state law.

Expedited Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, or E-SNAP, and “immediate needs” grants are intended to provide emergency assistance to the most vulnerable applicants for public benefits. In many cases, the New Yorkers who apply for and are eligible for such benefits lack income or resources and rely entirely on these benefits for groceries. Those who qualify for E-SNAP benefits include applicants who earn less than $150 in monthly gross income and whose liquid resources are $100 or less, migrant and seasonal farm workers with less than $100 in liquid resources, and others.

“The City’s broad and systemic failure to adequately provide E-SNAP and cash assistance to eligible New Yorkers has left thousands of families in dire straits struggling to feed themselves and their children and meet their basic needs,” said Emily Lundgren, an attorney with The Legal Aid Society. “The consequences of food instability are far-reaching, impacting the health, emotional, and mental well-being of individuals experiencing it. The City must immediately remedy their failures to provide emergency benefits and implement a corrective action plan.”

In 1998, Legal Aid and co-counsel litigated Reynolds v. Giuliani and secured a 2005 court order mandating that the City and HRA provide E-SNAP within seven days to desperate applicants without food or money to purchase food. The order also requires HRA to grant “immediate needs” cash benefits on the day the application was submitted. In addition, the 2005 order requires HRA to report monitoring data on access to benefits.

The contempt motion seeks to enforce the 2005 Order, to find the City and HRA in violation of the 2005 Order, and to direct the agency to take the corrective actions necessary to bring them into compliance with the 2005 Order by January 19, 2024.