California Gov. Gavin Newsom invoked Scripture while attacking Republican leadership over a federal shutdown that interrupted SNAP benefits, sparking a clash with the White House and prompting legal action from states and emergency responses from California officials. He tied feeding the hungry to biblical duty, called federal policy “cruel,” and vowed legal action as California rushed funds and resources to food banks. The dispute has Republican officials pointing to Democratic obstruction as the real barrier to reopening government programs.
Newsom stood in Sacramento with state leaders and leaned into religious texts to make his point, citing passages from Matthew, Isaiah, Luke and Proverbs. He framed feeding the poor as a moral imperative and a test of whether leaders who pray actually govern according to those teachings. For many Republicans, using faith as a political cudgel while ignoring other actions looks like opportunism rather than conviction.
Onstage he did not mince words: “It’s not a suggestion in the Old [and] the New Testament,” he said. “These guys need to stop the B.S. in Washington. They’re sitting there in their prayer breakfasts. Maybe they got an edited version of [President] Donald Trump’s Bible, and they edited all of that out. Cruelty is the policy.” That language landed hard and set off predictable pushback from conservatives.
The governor’s background in Catholic and Jesuit education came up as context for his remarks, and he even referenced “a wonderful Jesuit university” in explaining why feeding the hungry matters. But critics say selective appeals to faith don’t excuse policy inconsistencies, especially when state leaders have clashed with religious groups in other contexts. Republicans argue that rhetoric should match record before moral lectures get taken seriously.
California joined about two dozen other states in suing the federal government after the USDA announced a suspension of November SNAP benefits during the shutdown. State officials say they are stepping in with emergency funding and logistics to avoid a crisis for vulnerable families. Attorney General Rob Bonta insisted the agency has contingency funds and accused the federal side of “unlawfully withholding payments.”
Newsom also reignited an earlier public spat over the role of prayer after he posted a clip criticizing a White House official’s comment, writing, “These children were literally praying as they got shot at.” That earlier exchange fed into the current debate about sincerity and motive when political leaders invoke faith during crisis. Republicans note that the timing of moral pronouncements often matches political advantage.
Pressing the legal angle, Newsom promised, “We’re going to win this lawsuit.” He repeatedly framed the fight around everyday needs: “It’s about serving those that are hungry.” Those lines underscore the immediate human stakes, but for conservative critics they don’t erase broader questions about political responsibility in Congress.
California officials said the state accelerated $80 million to food banks and mobilized volunteers and National Guard members to move supplies to communities in need. Officials warned that CalFresh serves about 5.5 million residents each month and that a lapse in SNAP funding would worsen poverty and hunger. Republicans don’t dispute the emergency steps, but they point back to the spending and shutdown debates in Washington as the root cause.
The White House was blunt in its response, accusing Newsom of hypocrisy and shifting blame. “It’s preposterous that Newsom, who shuttered churches during COVID and recently derided the power of prayer, is now attempting to manipulate religion to fit his own political agenda,” Jackson said in a statement to Fox News Digital. “President Trump wants the government open — the Democrats’ insistence on keeping it shut down is hurting the American people, but they could prevent these harms by simply reopening the government. Instead of distorting religion for political means, Newsom should urge his fellow Democrats to reopen the government.”
On television, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins warned about funding limits and blamed Democrats for not voting on measures to reopen the government and restore SNAP. “We are right at the cliff. And I’ve been warning about this for almost a month now, that we have enough money to get us through the end of October. But after that, the government has to reopen,” Rollins said. That message is a hard-edged reminder that policy fights in Washington have immediate effects on food security for millions.
Both sides are now locked in a public battle over faith, policy and legal strategy, with California pushing emergency relief while pointing fingers at the federal shutdown. The dispute exposes a wider partisan divide over who is responsible for protecting vulnerable Americans and how faith should factor into public policy decisions. Expect more courtroom headlines and political counterpunches as the situation unfolds.
Darnell Thompkins is a conservative opinion writer from Atlanta, GA, known for his insightful commentary on politics, culture, and community issues. With a passion for championing traditional values and personal responsibility, Darnell brings a thoughtful Southern perspective to the national conversation. His writing aims to inspire meaningful dialogue and advocate for policies that strengthen families and empower individuals.