A federal judge on Monday struck down a key Trump administration initiative that sought to prevent food stamp recipients from using their benefits to purchase sugary beverages, candy, and certain dessert products.

The ruling overturned a series of waivers approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture since last year that allowed more than 20 states to restrict purchases made through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Under those waivers, participants in the program could have been barred from using benefits to buy items such as soda, energy drinks, candy, and other prepared sweets.

The legal challenge was filed in March by SNAP recipients in five states, who argued that the restrictions were unlawful, created confusion for beneficiaries, and made it harder for some individuals to manage medical conditions such as diabetes.

In a 68-page opinion issued Monday, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the U.S. District Court in Washington sided with the plaintiffs, concluding that the Agriculture Department lacked the authority to authorize the waivers and had also failed to comply with required public notice procedures.

The decision represented a significant setback for a policy championed by supporters of the Make America Healthy Again movement, who had touted the restrictions as a major public health victory.

Judge Jackson wrote that while federal law permits the department to authorize projects designed to improve the administration and efficiency of SNAP, the agency had gone far beyond that authority and effectively attempted to rewrite congressional definitions.

Judge Jackson stated that the department essentially “purports to waive not just a mere administrative or technical obstacle, but the very definition of ‘food’ as it was laid down by Congress.”

She further emphasized that policy goals, no matter how well-intentioned, cannot override statutory requirements.

“The federal defendants and the states may have a genuine desire to improve the health of SNAP households by encouraging healthy choices at the store, and they can take lawful steps to meet those goals,” she wrote. “But what they cannot do is violate the law and their own regulations along the way.”

The lawsuit was brought by the National Center for Law and Economic Justice, an advocacy organization focused on low-income Americans, together with the antitrust law firm Shinder Cantor Lerner.

Following the ruling, Katharine Deabler-Meadows, a senior attorney with the National Center for Law and Economic Justice, praised the court’s decision.

The ruling, she said, was “a major step in restoring essential food assistance to the millions of families that rely on SNAP nationwide.”

The Agriculture Department did not immediately comment on the decision. However, prior to the ruling, an agency spokesperson told The Associated Press that the department “will not be backing down from the fight to Make America Healthy Again.”