DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE et al

Filing 3

MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (Attachments: #1 Declaration STEVEN BANKS, #2 Declaration EDWARD BOLEN, #3 Declaration TIKKI BROWN, #4 Declaration CATHERINE BUHRIG, #5 Declaration ALEXIS CARMEN FERNANDEZ, #6 Declaration STEVE H. FISHER, #7 Declaration HOLLY FREISHTAT, #8 Declaration JEFFREY GASKELL, #9 Declaration DEIDRE S. GIFFORD, #10 Declaration HEATHER HARTLINE-GRAFTON, #11 Declaration DANIEL R. HAUN, #12 Declaration KATHLEEN KONOPKA, #13 Declaration ED LAZERE, #14 Declaration BRITTANY MANGINI, #15 Declaration VICTORIA NEGUS, #16 Declaration ELISA NEIRA, #17 Declaration S. DUKE STOREN, #18 Declaration DAWN M. SWEENEY, #19 Declaration LAURA ZEILINGER, #20 Text of Proposed Order)(Konopka, Kathleen). Added MOTION to Stay on 1/24/2020 (znmw).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, STATE
OF NEW YORK, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
CONNECTICUT, STATE OF
MARYLAND, COMMONWEALTH
OF MASSACHUSETTS, ATTORNEY
GENERAL DANA NESSEL ON
BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE OF
MICHIGAN, STATE OF
MINNESOTA, STATE OF NEVADA,
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, STATE
OF OREGON, COMMONWEALTH
OF PENNSYLVANIA, STATE OF
RHODE ISLAND, STATE OF
VERMONT, COMMONWEALTH OF
VIRGINIA, and CITY OF NEW
YORK,

Case No. 1:20-cv-00119

Plaintiffs,
v.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE; GEORGE ERVIN
PERDUE III, in his official capacity as
Secretary of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, and UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA,
Defendants.
DECLARATION OF VICTORIA NEGUS IN SUPPORT OF
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I, Victoria Negus, declare and state as follows:
1.

I am over the age of eighteen (18) years, competent to testify to the matters

contained herein, and testify based on my personal knowledge and information.
2.

I am a paralegal and anti-hunger advocate at the Massachusetts Law Reform

Institute (MLRI). MLRI is a statewide legal advocacy and support center. Our mission is to
represent very low-income individuals, including parents, children, persons with disabilities
and other barriers to employment, and older adults in their struggle for basic human needs. Our
activities include policy analysis, research, technical assistance and public information. We pay
particular attention to SNAP – the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program – because of its
critical role in reducing the hunger and food insecurity suffered by low-income households. In
addition to providing legal support and technical assistance to legal services field programs,
MLRI chairs the Massachusetts SNAP Coalition, which brings together hundreds of antihunger community partners across Massachusetts.
3.

In the course of my work, I have interacted directly with hundreds of low-income

households applying for or receiving SNAP, formerly known as the Food Stamp Program.
SNAP is Massachusetts’ most significant anti-hunger program. It provides crucial non-cash
nutritional support for over 760,000 low-income individuals in Massachusetts –1 in 9 of all
Massachusetts residents. I have seen close up the importance of SNAP in alleviating hunger
and malnutrition, and making it possible for people with limited incomes to obtain nutritious
food that they otherwise would not have. Many times when I have assisted people to qualify
for or keep their SNAP benefits, they have told me what a relief it is to know that they can buy
the food they need.
4.

I understand from my work with SNAP recipients that SNAP benefits are

especially critical in Massachusetts because our very high housing costs force low income

individuals to use a greater proportion of their limited household budgets for housing, leaving
less money available for food.
5.

I am very familiar with the policies governing the ABAWD time limit, which

requires certain non-exempt able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) to meet
specified work requirements in order to receive more than three months of SNAP benefits in a
36-month period. I have personally spoken with and advised dozens of individuals who were
determined by the state to be subject to the ABAWD rule and who lost or were at risk of losing
the SNAP benefits that made it possible for them to meet some of their nutritional needs.
6.

I am aware of the federal government’s recently issued final rule “Supplemental

Nutrition Assistance Program: Requirements for Able-Bodied Adults Without Dependents”
(“the Rule”). Effective April 1, 2020, the Rule will eliminate or restrict many of the criteria
upon which Massachusetts and other states have relied when applying for a waiver of the
ABAWD time limit. I have reviewed the Rule and am concerned about its impact on the
administration of SNAP in Massachusetts and on ABAWDs served by MLRI. I understand that
this lawsuit challenges the Rule.
7.

In my experience, consistent with national data, many SNAP recipients

determined to be ABAWDs have low educational attainment, health challenges, and few
support systems. They suffer higher rates of housing instability and poverty than the general
population. They face enormous impediments to securing and sustaining employment.
8.

ABAWD SNAP recipients in Massachusetts in my experience also rarely have the

skills needed for key Massachusetts industries such as healthcare, finance, insurance, and
technology, which often require advanced degrees and skills. The jobs available for the lowskilled workers with whom MLRI works, such as work in the hospitality, transportation, and
other service or gig economy sectors, are often contract-based and many do not offer reliable
2

schedules. Many ABAWD SNAP recipients served by MLRI are working, but are not working
the number of weekly hours required to meet the work requirement.
9.

Based on MLRI’s experience working with rural Massachusetts residents, the lack

of access to technology and transportation in rural Massachusetts presents additional
challenges for ABAWD SNAP recipients trying to secure steady employment.
10.

Once the waivers are eliminated, many very low-income individuals with whom

MLRI works will be subject to the ABAWD work requirement and will lose access to SNAP
benefits if they are unable to demonstrate they are exempt from or are meeting the ABAWD
work requirement. In my experience, these individuals include vulnerable populations such as
low-income veterans, individuals who do not have stable housing or with undiagnosed and
untreated mental health and cognitive impairments; domestic violence survivors; and young
people who are aging out of foster care. These individuals will no longer be able to meet their
basic nutritional needs.
11.

Many ABAWD SNAP recipients served by MLRI live with and get SNAP with

other people – such as aging parents, siblings, or adult children. When these ABAWDs lose
SNAP benefits, the extended household also has fewer resources to pay for food and is harmed
as a result.
12.

In addition to the more immediate harm, the Rule’s elimination or restriction of

key waiver criteria will harm the ability of Massachusetts to quickly and effectively respond to
an economic downturn and provide needed benefits to populations served by MLRI.
13.

In sum, the Rule will have severe negative impacts on the nutritional status, health

and well being of ABAWDs served by MLRI, who are many of Massachusetts’ most
vulnerable residents and the communities in which they reside.

3

I declare under penalty of perjury that the forgoing is true and correct and of my own
personal knowledge. Executed on December 30, 2019 in Boston, Massachusetts.

December 30, 2019
_______________________________

_____________________________

Victoria Negus

Date

4