(NEXSTAR) – On May 19, Nebraska became the first state in the country to obtain a waiver from the USDA to ban residents from purchasing sugary drinks with benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). By the end of the week, the USDA had granted similar exemptions for Iowa and Indiana.

Not all waivers were seeking the same restrictions, however. Nebraska’s waiver will effectively prohibit the purchases of soda and energy drinks with SNAP benefits. Iowa’s will ban nearly all “taxable” food items, as defined by Iowa law. And in Illinois, SNAP recipients won’t be able to buy soda or candy under the new restrictions.

The benefits or consequences of such restrictions have yet to be seen, as they won’t go into effect until Jan. 1, 2026. But governors in a handful of other states have already submitted requests for their own SNAP waivers, with the intention of restricting certain foods or drinks or, in a few cases, easing restrictions within their own food-assistance programs.

In April, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) submitted a waiver seeking permission to exclude “soft drinks and candy” from permitted SNAP purchases. Idaho Gov. Brad Little (R) and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) also filed for waivers in May, requesting exemptions to ban “soft drinks and candy” and “sweetened drinks and candy,” respectively. And making its way through the Utah state legislature is a bill seeking to restrict soft drink purchases under SNAP.

West Virginia Gov. Patrick West Morrisey, meanwhile, has submitted a waiver to request that soda is “no longer an entitlement” to those receiving assistance. But he also indicated that he was asking to expand access to hot foods which are generally not permitted to be purchased with SNAP benefits.

Joining him in these efforts is Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D), whose waiver seeks to make sweetened beverages unavailable for purchase with food stamps, but “permit SNAP participants to buy a full range of hot prepared foods from grocery stores, including rotisserie chickens,” a representative for the Colorado Department of Human Services confirmed to Nexstar.

It’s likely that many of these requests will ultimately be approved (in their current form or otherwise) by USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins, who approved Nebraska, Iowa, and Indiana’s requests.

Rollins, like many of the Republican governors who supported the idea of these waivers, credited President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy (and his “Make America Healthy Again” initiative) with her decisions.

“President Trump has given our nation a once in a generation opportunity to change the health trajectory for our entire country,” Rollins, who was sworn in this past February, was quoted as saying in a press release last Friday.

“I look forward to signing even more waivers in the days ahead as we continue to restore the health of America,” she said.

In her statement, Rollins had also included Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (D) among a list of governors who “stepped up” to request a waiver. But Kelly, who was initially supportive of a waiver, has since retracted her support for any state-mandated restrictions to SNAP purchases.

Kelly ultimately vetoed a bill approving a waiver request, claiming the SNAP restrictions would hurt businesses. She also said the definition of allowable foods was “nonsensical,” as it allegedly allowed the purchases of candy bars but not protein bars or trail mix.

“I support the idea that Kansans should eat healthier. However, changes to the SNAP food assistance program should be made at the federal level, not on a patchwork, state-by-state basis,” Kelly said.

Anti-hunger advocates have criticized the waivers, too, saying they add costs, boost administrative burdens, and increase stigma for people already facing food insecurity.

Gina Plata-Nino, a deputy director at the nonprofit advocacy group Food Research & Action Center, had argued that Nebraska’s waiver “ignores decades of evidence showing that incentive-based approaches not punitive restrictions are the most effective, dignified path to improving nutrition and reducing hunger.”

Until this month, the USDA had also rejected the waivers, saying there were no clear standards to define certain foods as good or bad. In addition, the agency had said restrictions would be difficult to implement, complicated and costly, and would not necessarily change recipients’ food purchases or reduce health problems such as obesity.

Under Rollins, though, the USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) now appears much more willing to approve and even refine the waivers.

“FNS continues to collaborate extensively with each state on their proposals, which includes holding near daily technical assistance calls with each submitting state,” a spokesperson for the USDA told Nexstar. “There is no perfect timeline as each State is approaching this differently.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.