payments

Edison International Chief Executive Pedro Pizarro said Wednesday that the utility expects the first Eaton fire victims who have agreed not to sue the utility to get their settlement offers later this month.

In an interview, Pizarro said that the utility decided to create the program to pay victims before the fire investigation was complete to get money to them more quickly and because it has become more apparent that the company’s equipment ignited the inferno that killed 19 people.

“There is no other clear probable cause at this point,” he said.

More than 6,000 homes and other properties were destroyed in the Jan. 7 fire that started under an Edison transmission tower in Eaton Canyon. The flames damaged an additional 700 to 800 homes, according to Edison.

Those homes, as well as more than 11,000 others that were damaged by smoke and ash, are eligible for compensation under Edison’s plan. To receive the money, the victims must agree not to sue Edison for the fire.

So far 580 people have applied for compensation, Pizarro said.

He said that if the person accepts the company’s offer, they would be paid within 30 days. “We’ve staffed it to move very quickly.” he said.

Pizarro said the utility is expecting to swiftly be reimbursed for the amounts it pays to victims by a state wildfire fund that Gov. Gavin Newsom and lawmakers created to keep utilities from bankruptcy if their equipment sparks a catastrophic fire.

The first $1 billion in damage costs will be covered by an insurance policy paid for by the utility’s electric customers.

In April, Pizarro said that a leading theory of the fire’s cause was that a century-old transmission line, not used since 1971, reenergized through a process called induction and sparked the fire.

Induction is when magnetic fields created by a nearby live line cause a dormant line to electrify. The unused line runs parallel to other energized high-voltage transmission wires running through Eaton Canyon.

Asked why Edison did not turn off those transmission lines on Jan. 7, Pizarro said in the interview that the company’s protocol at the time, which analyzes wind speed and other risk factors, did not call for a preventive shutoff.

He said the Los Angeles County Fire department and Cal Fire are continuing their investigation into the official cause of the fire.

“We’ve given them everything they’ve asked for,” he said.

At the same time, he said, Edison and lawyers for victims who have filed lawsuits are working jointly on a separate investigation that is gathering detailed information on the fire’s cause.

Pizarro said that he and the company have pledged to be transparent about details of the fire’s cause.

“As significant material things come out we will make that known,” he said.

“I need to go to the supermarket in Pasadena or Altadena and be able to look people in the eye,” Pizarro said. “We want to do the right thing for our community.”

States administering a federal food aid program serving about 42 million Americans faced uncertainty Monday over whether they can — and should — provide full monthly benefits during an ongoing legal battle involving the U.S. government shutdown.

President Donald Trump’s administration over the weekend demanded that states “undo” full benefits that were paid under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program during a one-day window between when a federal judge ordered full funding and a Supreme Court justice put a temporary pause on that order.

A federal appeals court in Boston left the full benefits order in place on Sunday, though the Supreme Court order ensures the government won’t have to pay out for at least 48 hours. The Trump administration is also expected to ask the justices to step in again, and Congress is considering whether to fund SNAP as part of a proposal to end the government shutdown.

Some states are warning of “catastrophic operational disruptions” if the Trump administration does not reimburse them for those SNAP benefits they already authorized. Meanwhile, other states are providing partial monthly SNAP benefits with federal money or using their own funds to load electronic benefit cards for SNAP recipients.

Millions receive aid while others wait

Trump’s administration initially said SNAP benefits would not be available in November because of the government shutdown. After some states and nonprofit groups sued, two judges each ruled the administration could not skip November’s benefits entirely.

The administration then said it would use an emergency reserve fund to provide 65% of the maximum monthly benefit. On Thursday, U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell said that wasn’t good enough, and ordered full funding for SNAP benefits by Friday.

Some states acted quickly to direct their EBT vendors to disburse full monthly benefits to SNAP recipients. Millions of people in those states received funds to buy groceries before Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson put McConnell’s order on hold Friday night, pending further deliberation by an appeals court.

Millions more people still have not received SNAP payments for November, because their states were waiting on further guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers SNAP.

Trump’s administration has argued that the judicial order to provide full benefits violates the Constitution by infringing on the spending power of the legislative and executive branches.

States are fighting attempt to freeze SNAP benefits

On Sunday, the Trump administration said states had moved too quickly and erroneously released full SNAP benefits after last week’s rulings.

“States must immediately undo any steps taken to issue full SNAP benefits for November 2025,” Patrick Penn, deputy undersecretary of Agriculture, wrote to state SNAP directors. He warned that states could face penalties if they did not comply.

Wisconsin, which was among the first to load full benefits after McConnell’s order, had its federal reimbursement frozen. As a result, the state’s SNAP account could be depleted as soon Monday, leaving no money to reimburse stores that sell food to SNAP recipients, according to a court filing submitted by those that had sued.

Some Democratic governors vowed to challenge any federal attempt to claw back money.

In Connecticut, Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont said “those who received their benefits should not worry about losing them.”

“No, Connecticut does not need to take back SNAP benefits already sent to the 360,000 people who depend on them for food and who should have never been caught in the middle of this political fight,” Lamont said. “We have their back.”

Lieb and Mulvihill write for the Associated Press. Associated Press writers Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin; John Hanna in Topeka, Kansas; and Nicholas Riccardi in Denver contributed to this report.

Nov. 7 (UPI) — The Trump administration on Friday night appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court after a federal appeals court upheld a district judge’s order to pay full benefits in November to 42 million in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

A short time earlier, the 1st District Circuit left in place a decision on Thursday by Rhode Island federal Judge Jack McConnell, who ordered the administration to pay out the full benefits within one day, saying, “People have gone without for too long.”

The three-member appeals court’s decision means the U.S. Department of Agriculture must take steps to disperse the electronic payments, which are staggered each month. Earlier Friday, the agency said it notified states that it is working to process the payments.

The panel was Chief Appellate Judge David Barron, appointed by President Barack Obama, and Gustavo Atavo Gelpi Jr. and Julie Rikelman, both picked by President Joe Biden.

The judges said that they are still considering a bid for longer relief while assessing the appeal.

Attorney General Pam Bondi posted on X the Trump administration will ask the Supreme Court to stay the Rhode Island-based lower court judge’s ruling, which she called “judicial activism at its worst.”

“A single district court in Rhode Island should not be able to seize center stage in the shutdown, seek to upend political negotiations that could produce swift political solutions for SNAP and other programs, and dictate its own preferences for how scarce federal funds should be spent,” Bondi said.

Seven days ago, McDonnell and U.S. District Court of Massachusetts Judge Indira Talwani told the Trump administration to access available funds to continue. They were both nominated by Obama.

On Monday, the administration told the judge it only had reserved money to pay out 50% of the total $9 billion cost. Then, it was raised to 65%.

The judge directed USDA to find $4 billion “in the metaphorical couch cushions.”

McConnell said the administration could use Section 32 funds, which the USDA uses to help with child nutrition programs. But the administration rejected that plan.

In the appeal, DOJ claimed that the judge’s order “makes a mockery of the separation of powers.” Lawyers said transferring funds would mean diverting money from Child Nutrition Programs.

“Unfortunately, by injecting itself with its erroneous short-term solution, the district court has scrambled ongoing political negotiations, extending the shutdown and thus undercutting its own objective of ensuring adequate funding for SNAP and all other crucial safety-net programs,” they said.

Plaintiffs in the case, which are nonprofit organizations, asked for the full payment, and McConnell agreed.

“The evidence shows that people will go hungry, food pantries will be overburdened, and needless suffering will occur” if SNAP is not fully funded, he said.

“While the president of the United States professes a commitment to helping those it serves, the government’s actions tell a different story,” McConnell wrote in a written order.

The federal government has been shut down since Oct. 1, and the shutdown is now the longest in history.

In every past shutdown, emergency funds have been used to fund the program.

McConnell also mentioned a social media post that Trump made, saying he refused to release any more funds until “the radical-left Democrats open up government, which they can easily do, and not before.”

The post was used as evidence that the administration would ignore McConnell’s order.

BOSTON — President Trump ’s administration asked a federal appeals court Friday to block a judge’s order that it distribute November’s full monthly SNAP food benefits amid a U.S. government shutdown, even as at least some states said they were moving quickly to get the money to people.

The judge gave the Trump administration until Friday to make the payments through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. But the administration asked the appeals court to suspend any court orders requiring it to spend more money than is available in a contingency fund, and instead allow it to continue with planned partial SNAP payments for the month.

The court filing came even as Wisconsin said Friday that some SNAP recipients in the state already got their full November payments overnight on Thursday.

“We’ve received confirmation that payments went through, including members reporting they can now see their balances,” said Britt Cudaback, a spokesperson for Democratic Gov. Tony Evers.

Uncertainty remains for many SNAP recipients

The court wrangling prolonged weeks of uncertainty for the food program that serves about 1 in 8 Americans, mostly with lower incomes.

An individual can receive a monthly maximum food benefit of nearly $300 and a family of four up to nearly $1,000, although many receive less than that under a formula that takes into consideration their income. For many SNAP participants, it remains unclear exactly how much they will receive this month, and when they will receive it.

Jasmen Youngbey of Newark, N.J., waited in line Friday at a food pantry in the state’s largest city. As a single mom attending college, Youngbey said she relies on SNAP to help feed her 7-month-old and 4-year-old sons. But she said her account balance was at $0.

“Not everybody has cash to pull out and say, ‘OK, I’m going to go and get this,’ especially with the cost of food right now,” she said.

Tihinna Franklin, a school bus guard who was waiting in the same line outside the United Community Corp. food pantry, said her SNAP account balance was at 9 cents and she was down to three items in her freezer. She typically relies on the roughly $290 a month in SNAP benefits to help feed her grandchildren.

“If I don’t get it, I won’t be eating,” she said. “My money I get paid for, that goes to the bills, rent, electricity, personal items. That is not fair to us as mothers and caregivers.”

The legal battle over SNAP takes another twist

Because of the federal government shutdown, the Trump administration originally had said SNAP benefits would not be available in November. However, two judges ruled last week that the administration could not skip November’s benefits entirely because of the shutdown. One of those judges was U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell Jr., who ordered the full payments Thursday.

In both cases, the judges ordered the government to use one emergency reserve fund containing more than $4.6 billion to pay for SNAP for November but gave it leeway to tap other money to make the full payments, which cost between $8.5 billion and $9 billion each month.

On Monday, the administration said it would not use additional money, saying it was up to Congress to appropriate the funds for the program and that the other money was needed to shore up other child hunger programs.

Thursday’s federal court order rejected the Trump administration’s decision to cover only 65% of the maximum monthly benefit, a decision that could have left some recipients getting nothing for this month.

In its court filing Friday, Trump’s administration contended that Thursday’s directive to fund full SNAP benefits runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution.

“This unprecedented injunction makes a mockery of the separation of powers. Courts hold neither the power to appropriate nor the power to spend,” the U.S. Department of Justice wrote in its request to the court.

In response, attorneys for the cities and nonprofits challenging Trump’s administration said the government has plenty of available money and the court should “not allow them to further delay getting vital food assistance to individuals and families who need it now.”

States are taking different approaches to food aid

Some states said they stood ready to distribute SNAP money as quickly as possible.

The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services said it directed a vendor servicing its SNAP electronic benefit cards to issue full SNAP benefits soon after the federal funding is received.

Benefits are provided to individuals on different days of the month. Those who normally receive benefits on the third, fifth or seventh of the month should receive their full SNAP allotment within 48 hours of funds becoming available, the Michigan agency said, and others should receive their full benefits on their regularly scheduled dates.

Meanwhile, North Carolina’s Department of Health and Human Services said that partial SNAP benefits were distributed Friday, based on the Trump administration’s previous decision. Officials in Illinois and North Dakota also said they were distributing partial November payments, starting as soon as Friday for some recipients.

In Missouri, where officials had been working on partial distribution, the latest court jostling raised new questions. A spokesperson for the state Department of Social Services said Friday that it is awaiting further guidance about how to proceed from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers SNAP.

Amid the federal uncertainty, Delaware’s Democratic Gov. Matt Meyer said the state used its own funds Friday to provide the first of could be a weekly relief payment to SNAP recipients.

On Thursday, Nebraska’s Republican Gov. Jim Pillen downplayed the effect of paused SNAP benefits on families in his state, saying, “Nobody’s going to go hungry.” The multimillionaire said food pantries, churches and other charitable services would fill the gap.

Lieb, Casey and Bauer write for the Associated Press. Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Mo., and Bauer from Madison, Wisc. AP writers Margery Beck in Omaha; Mike Catalini in Newark, N.J.; Jack Dura in Bismarck, N.D.; Mingson Lau in Claymont, Del.; John O’Connor, in Springfield, Ill.; and Gary D. Robertson in Raleigh, N.C., contributed to this report.