I assume the charge is soliciting kickbacks, offering to refer clients to specific lawyers preferentially over other lawyers in exchange for donations. And I would assume the underlying purpose is to stop SNAP from doing this. That would not be accomplished by going after the lawyers.

My guess is that the lawyers involved are much to smart to get caught up in such a scheme, and that the suit will fail. 

What I would like to know more about is what victims have to say about there interactions with SNAP?