Arcy Pon v. United States

facts are known to the parties, we repeat them only as necessary to explain our

decision.

In her application to accept SNAP payments at her store, Pon agreed “to

comply with all statutory and regulatory requirements associated with participation

in the” SNAP. Those statutory and regulatory requirements demonstrate that

SNAP “trafficking”—that is, exchanging SNAP funds “for cash or consideration

other than eligible food”—is strongly disfavored. See 7 C.F.R. § 271.2. Indeed, a

store is permanently disqualified from participating in the SNAP if it commits even

a single “trafficking” violation. 7 U.S.C. § 2021(b)(3)(B); 7 C.F.R.

§ 278.6(e)(1)(i). Moreover, the Food and Nutrition Service, which administers the

SNAP, is entitled to rely on “evidence obtained through a transaction report” in

identifying potential trafficking and determining whether to disqualify a store.

7 U.S.C. § 2021(a)(2).

To that end, to support its summary judgment motion, the Government

presented evidence regarding hundreds of transactions, alleging trafficking at

Pon’s store. The Food and Nutrition Service agent who investigated Pon’s store

explained in detail how the agency determined these…