Iowa Man Sues State After SNAP Benefits Rejected Due to Past Arrests

A man from Iowa is suing state officials after being repeatedly denied food assistance through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

According to court documents, his requests for SNAP benefits were denied multiple times because of his past criminal record, even though he had not been convicted for many of the arrests mentioned by the state.

The man, identified as Charles William Hall of Des Moines, claims the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) unfairly rejected his applications for food benefits based on his arrest history, some of which did not lead to charges or convictions. He has now filed a lawsuit in federal court, arguing that the denial violates his constitutional rights.

Hall’s lawsuit states that Iowa officials wrongfully used past arrests as a reason to declare him “fleeing from justice,” a term that disqualifies individuals from receiving SNAP benefits under federal law.

However, Hall says he has never been a fugitive and has never avoided law enforcement. He has been living in the same place and regularly reports to authorities when required.

According to the lawsuit, the state continued to deny him benefits despite court records showing that many of the charges had been dismissed or resolved. Hall’s legal team argues that the policy used by HHS is flawed and causes unnecessary harm to people who are already struggling to survive.

The issue began in 2022 when Hall was arrested on several charges. Some were dropped, and others were resolved without a prison sentence. Still, in late 2023 and early 2024, his SNAP applications were rejected based on these incidents.

He was told he was ineligible because of being “actively fleeing” from the law, even though there were no active warrants or attempts by law enforcement to find him.

Hall’s lawsuit calls this claim false and says it has made his life more difficult. He is unemployed and says he needs assistance to afford food. He believes the department’s decision goes against federal SNAP guidelines and violates his right to due process.

Legal experts say the case could set a precedent for how states interpret and apply SNAP disqualification rules. Under federal law, individuals can be denied food assistance if they are actively fleeing prosecution or failing to appear in court.

But Hall’s legal team argues that being arrested in the past, without an active warrant, does not meet this standard.

They also claim the process Iowa uses does not give individuals a proper chance to explain or contest the reason for their disqualification. In Hall’s case, he said he was never allowed to present evidence or fairly appeal the decision.

In the lawsuit, Hall is asking the court to order Iowa’s HHS to stop using arrest records as the sole reason to deny food assistance. He is also seeking damages and legal fees. The case is still in early stages and could take months before a judge decides whether it will proceed.

A spokesperson for Iowa’s HHS has not responded to questions about the case or the policy in question. The department has not yet filed a formal reply in court.

This lawsuit highlights the struggles many people with criminal records face when trying to get basic support, like food assistance.

Advocates say the current rules often punish individuals unfairly and make it harder for them to rebuild their lives. They argue that programs like SNAP are meant to help people in need, not to judge them for their past.

For now, Hall waits for the court to decide whether Iowa’s actions were legal, or whether the system needs to change. His story raises an important question: Should past arrests, especially without convictions, be enough to take away someone’s access to food?