This week’s federal policy roundup covers immigration enforcement, healthcare access, food assistance, and press freedom. Key developments include the cancellation of more than 750,000 ACA marketplace plans; a court ruling requiring notice before third country deportations; a judge striking down USDA’s unlawful SNAP implementation timeline; and a permanent block on a directive that would have restricted immigrant access to Head Start and other federal programs.
Trump Administration Cancels More Than 750,000 ACA Marketplace Plans
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) asked insurers to review nearly 1.2 million broker-assisted enrollments lacking Social Security numbers or immigration documentation. The review narrowed to those whose premiums were fully covered by tax credits, who filed no claims, and had no record of contacting their insurer. Insurers gave flagged enrollees 30 days to respond and canceled coverage for those who did not. The Trump administration canceled Affordable Care Act marketplace coverage for more than 750,000 enrollees, about 4 percent of marketplace enrollments. Vice President Vance claimed the enrollments were improper or fraudulent and estimated the move would save $2.2 billion in premium tax credits. The screening criteria alone do not independently establish fraud as missing information, or a failure to respond within 30 days may reflect enrollment problems unrelated to eligibility. Legitimate enrollees whose plans were canceled can seek reinstatement by providing a Social Security number, but CMS offered no explanation of the process for those without one. The cancellations come as enrollment has already declined following the expiration of enhanced premium tax credits.
Judge Temporarily Restores White House Access for Three News Outlets as White House Launches Taxpayer-Funded TV Stream
President Trump announced September 18 that CNN, MS NOW, and Politico would be barred from the White House, citing reporting he called false and negative. Their press badges were disabled the following day. The three outlets sued Monday, alleging the ban punished them for the content of their reporting and denied them notice or an opportunity to contest the decision. On Thursday, a federal judge ordered the administration to restore their press passes immediately and barred enforcement of the ban for 14 days while the lawsuit proceeds. The judge found the outlets likely to succeed on their claims, noting the record did not support a national security justification and that the White House had not given the outlets a meaningful chance to contest the revocations before they took effect.
After CNN was removed from a scheduled television pool assignment, other networks suspended pool coverage of presidential events. The White House responded by launching a taxpayer-funded 24-hour YouTube stream featuring administration announcements and White House-produced footage. The stream lacks independent reporting and context, and some clips do not identify when they were recorded, making it difficult to distinguish current events from older footage.
Appeals Court Rejects DHS Policy for Rapid Third Country Deportations
The First Circuit unanimously upheld a ruling setting aside a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy that allowed deportations to third countries with little or no advance notice to deportees. Under the March 2025 policy, DHS could remove people to a third country without notice if that country provided diplomatic assurances against persecution or torture, or with as little as six hours’ notice for other destinations. The court held that diplomatic assurances do not eliminate the requirement to give people notice of their intended destination and a meaningful opportunity to raise safety concerns before removal.
DHS has already sent more than 25,000 people to third countries under the administration. The ruling does not prohibit third country deportations but requires a process for assessing fear-based claims beforehand. It is especially significant for people with final removal orders who are protected from returning to their home countries, as a third country destination may present dangers never examined in their original proceedings. On Thursday, the Trump administration filed an emergency application to the Supreme Court to allow this deportation program to continue. DHS says its policy remains in force while the stay has not yet ended.
Federal Judge Strikes Down USDA’s SNAP Implementation Deadline and Noncitizen Eligibility Guidance
A federal judge ruled for 22 states and the District of Columbia in their challenge to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) implementation of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) changes under H.R. 1, making permanent protections the court had temporarily imposed in December 2025. USDA told states their 120-day implementation period began July 4, 2025, when the law took effect, but did not issue eligibility guidance until October 31, one day before it said the period would end. The judge found the July 4 start date unlawful, ruling the period must begin when states are required to implement the changes, not when the law takes effect.
The court also rejected USDA guidance that excluded former refugees, asylum grantees, and certain Afghan and Ukrainian parolees from SNAP eligibility after becoming lawful permanent residents. Those groups remain eligible without a five-year wait under federal law. The ruling does not undo H.R. 1’s SNAP restrictions but prevents USDA from enforcing its implementation deadline and eligibility guidance. States warned that higher SNAP payment error rates could trigger substantial new costs and threaten their ability to continue administering the program.
Judge Permanently Blocks Directive Restricting Immigrant Access to Federal Programs
A federal judge permanently blocked a July 2025 Trump administration directive that would have reclassified programs including Head Start, community health clinics, and adult education under a federal law restricting some immigrants’ access to benefits. The directive would have restricted access for work and student visa holders, Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders, and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients legally present in the United States. States that challenged the directive had warned that immigration-status checks could deter eligible families from seeking services and impose new administrative burdens on providers. The judge found that the administration had failed to use the required notice-and-comment process. Because the directive was temporarily blocked before it took effect, the ruling preserves existing access to the affected programs. The administration could still pursue similar changes through proper rulemaking