If you would take that pointy hood off, you might be able to see clearer ... which would greatly enable you to READ CAREFULLY AND COMPREHENSIVELY.
Also, you could sharpen your ability to keep abreast of current information, as this topic is just under a month old. Observe:
At least 27 states turned over sensitive data about food stamp recipients to USDA
.... Democratic state officials have argued the data demand is unlawful and likely part of a pattern of the Trump administration aggregating Americans' personal data for purposes that include immigration enforcement.
Those states won a victory in court on Wednesday when U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney in San Francisco issued a preliminary order blocking the Trump administration from punishing them for refusing to turn over SNAP data.
The ruling means as the case continues, the Trump administration cannot legally follow through with threats to withhold SNAP administrative funds that add up to billions of dollars annually from 21 states and the District of Columbia that are parties to the lawsuit and have not shared the data.
Chesney wrote in her 25-page order the states are likely to succeed in their claim that "USDA, in demanding such data, acted in a manner contrary to law," and "states are likely to show the SNAP Act prohibits them from disclosing to USDA the information demanded."
www.npr.org/2025/10/16/nx-s1-5533045/snap-privacy-usda-lawsuit
Given that the apartheid punk Musk has only God knows how much private information on American citizens with Dump's approval, states are have good reason to resist such moves. Also, it's kind of interesting that the very same administration that had no problem in imposing all types of food emergencies on SNAP recipients to get it's way to put the screws to the ACA is suddenly apoplectic that they can't get intricate access to their information.
Only die hard maga mooks and alr-right reich rats have no problem with this ... the very people who at one time screamed bloody murder about the "shadow gov't" and "nanny state" having too much control on private citizens and their personal business. A conundrum, n'cest pas?