Month: February 2026
The Gavel and Your Paycheck: Why the Latest Judicial Nominations Matter for Every American Worker
Whether you are a barista, a middle manager, or a factory supervisor, you probably don’t spend your Tuesday mornings checking the federal judicial nomination list. It feels like “D.C. noise”—distant, political, and largely irrelevant to your daily shift.
But as a plaintiff’s lawyer in Austin, TX who fights for workers nationwide, I’m here to tell you: The person sitting behind that federal bench may have more power over your career than your own boss does.
And, the current administration is changing the game on judicial nominations and the face of the judiciary in a way that may harm workers’ rights for decades to come. As we start 2026, the rules of the game are changing, and politics is to blame. If you’ve ever dealt with employment law or care about these issues, the latest news from Washington should be on your radar.
Recent reports from Reuters confirm that the administration has launched into 2026 with four new judicial nominees, including Anna St. John, nominated to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (Reuters, Jan 7, 2026). St. John comes from the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute, a group known for its “crusade” against class action settlements—the very tool workers use to band together when a company steals wages or discriminates on a mass scale.
This follows a year of rapid appointments aimed at reshaping the courts with younger, “originalist” judges. Some of these lifetime appointees have raised serious alarms. For instance, Whitney D. Hermandorfer, a 37-year-old nominee for the Sixth Circuit, has faced intense scrutiny for her lack of trial experience and her history as lead counsel defending restrictive state laws that intersect with worker privacy and health (Truthout, June 10, 2025).
At the same time, Bloomberg Law notes a significant change in how these nominees are being revealed. By bypassing traditional vetting periods—shrinking the window from the standard 28 days to as little as 48 hours for some nominees—the opportunity for regular citizens and legal experts to scrutinize these lifetime appointments has virtually vanished (Bloomberg Law, Nov 10, 2025).
Why does this matter to the average worker? Because these judges generally have a broad skepticism of worker protections and a deep-seated affinity for corporate autonomy. Furthermore, we are seeing a judiciary increasingly friendly to mandatory arbitration. You likely signed one of these in a stack of paperwork on your first day. It’s a clause that says if the company breaks the law, you can’t sue them in public court. Instead, you have to go to a private, secret hearing.
The 2025-26 nominees are largely pro-arbitration and anti-class action. This means that for the millions of Americans in retail, healthcare, and tech, the “right to a trial” is becoming a relic of the past. When judges refuse to strike down unfair arbitration clauses or make it impossible to file a class action, they effectively hand large corporations a “get out of jail free” card.
The law is only as strong as the person interpreting it. While 2026 brings new challenges for the American worker, it doesn’t mean you and I are powerless. It just means you have to be smarter, better prepared, and more involved than before.
Lifetime appointments mean these decisions will affect not just your current job, but your children’s jobs. We must use the ballot box and our collective voices to ensure that those who hold the gavel actually respect the rights of the people who do the work.
Written By Austin Kaplan, SU4W Board Member and Attorney at the Kaplan Law Firm, PLLC
Report from the Occupied City of Minneapolis: The Chilling Impact of ICE Operations
I am on the ground in Minneapolis, witnessing a city transformed by fear and uncertainty.
The killing of Renee Good occurred just minutes from my home and Alex Pretti just a few blocks further—a vivid reminder of the pervasive violence that now shadows even the most familiar corners of this beautiful, loving community. I have lived in this city since 1980. We pride ourselves on being a progressive, welcoming place, where diversity is celebrated and kindness is the norm. Today, that sense of safety and belonging feels far away.
The atmosphere here is heavy with anxiety. Many residents, particularly those from Hispanic backgrounds, are afraid to leave their homes, even for essential tasks like buying food. I am one of those old-fashioned people who still receive a daily paper at my door. Just this week I received a heartfelt letter from the Hispanic couple who delivers my newspaper, apologizing for missed deliveries out of fear for their safety. Their words echo the sentiments of countless others, including workers, students, and worshippers who now avoid workplaces, businesses, schools, and churches. The threat of ICE operations has cast a long, dark shadow over everyday life here, prompting many to stay indoors and isolate themselves from the community that we all love.
The local economy is also visibly suffering. Minority-owned businesses, once vibrant centers of commerce and culture, are now struggling as customers and employees alike stay away. Widespread stories of raids and detentions have sent shockwaves through the business community, leading to reduced economic activity and loss of income for families dependent on these establishments. The ripple effect extends to schools and churches, where attendance has plummeted, further eroding the social fabric of our city.The current climate in Minneapolis evokes troubling historical parallels. The fear, the suspicion, the sense of being watched and hunted. These are not memories from another time and place, but realities faced by our community today. The indiscriminate nature of the operations here leaves no one untouched, and the psychological toll is immeasurable. It is unspeakable that such conditions exist in a city known for its openness and progressive values.
As if the social and economic challenges were not enough, Minneapolis is now gripped by the bitter cold of winter. The national news reported last night that the city streets were quiet. Well, no kidding. It was 4 below zero. We are used to the cold, but combine that with ICE, and the effect on the community is unbearable.
Minneapolis is enduring an occupation of fear and uncertainty, its people held captive not just by ICE operations but by a loss of trust, security, a safe home and a stable workplace. Good people are afraid, and the damage to our community—socially, economically, and emotionally—is profound. It breaks my heart to see what is happening here.
Reliable reports place the percentage of undocumented immigrants in Minnesota at 1.5 percent. That’s right, 1.5 percent. Despite that low number, we are being targeted. Minneapolis is a politically progressive city, the first district in the country to elect a Muslim representative to Congress. The relationship between our politics and the target on our back is unmistakable, and that should make us all consider where we are and what we need to do.
Written By James Kaster, Founder and Chair of Stand Up For Workers and Partner at Nichols Kaster in Minneapolis.
Candidate Spotlight: Chris Pappas
Democrat Chris Pappas, a candidate for the U.S. Senate for the New Hampshire seat being vacated by Sen. Jean Shaheen, has had an impressive political career thus far.
He has kept to a moderate path on many issues, but his voting record on legislation supported by the Stand Up for Workers PAC and his near-100% rating by the AFL-CIO, along with his strong odds of success in the upcoming elections, make him an attractive candidate for the PAC.
The young Harvard College graduate was elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives in 2002 at 22, the youngest person elected to that body, serving two terms before winning election as Hillsborough County treasurer, as which he served until 2010. He was elected to the New Hampshire Executive Council in 2012. He won re-election in 2014 and 2016, was first elected to Congress in 2019, and re-elected three times since. And, he is also the first openly gay representative elected by New Hampshire.
Before entering politics, Pappas helped manage a family-owned Manchester restaurant called the Puritan Backroom, a popular visiting spot for presidential candidates campaigning in the early-primary state. (His grandfather also invented chicken tenders at the Puritan in 1974.) He and his husband live in Manchester, the state’s largest city.
Pappas represents New Hampshire’s First District, which covers principally the eastern half of the state, but which doesn’t include many of the communities which line the state’s southern border with Massachusetts, where many liberal leaning tax refugees from that state are thought to live. Perhaps in part due to the fairly rural demographics of his district, Pappas has been careful to pursue a moderate course during his time thus far in the House. He was ranked the most bi-partisan Democrat in the House in 2023 by the Lugar Center. He has, unsurprisingly, a strong record on supporting gay rights, and actively advocated for restoring federal subsidies to make health insurance premiums affordable for many Americans, including many workers not receiving employment-related health insurance.
Most significantly for the PAC, Pappas has a 99% lifetime rating from the AFL- CIO. He has voted for, among other bills, Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act, the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act, the Paycheck Fairness Act, the Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act, and the Raise the Wage Act. Pappas has drawn arguably the greatest criticism for his support of the Laken Riley Act. This act, which arose from the killing in Georgia of a woman named Laken Riley by an undocumented immigrant, requires that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) agency detain certain non-citizen aliens without bail during their immigration proceedings. This detention requirement applies to any individual who “… is charged with, is arrested for, is convicted of, admits having committed, or admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of any burglary, theft, larceny, shoplifting, or assault of a law enforcement officer … or any crime that results in death or serious bodily injury to another person.”
These requirements apply irrespective of whether there was any process, such as investigation or trial, involved. Many national civil rights organizations opposed the bill, including the Center for Constitutional Rights, the League of Women Voters, the NAACP Legal Defense, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.
Recently, Pappas has called for Kristi Noem, the Secretary of Homeland Security, to resign or to be impeached. He has stated that ICE is “out of control, violating due process, the public trust, and standards of law enforcement.” On January 22, 2026, two days before Alex Pretti was murdered in Minneapolis, he introduced a bill that would redirect almost $75 billion in federal funding away from ICE and to local law enforcement, supporting the hiring of 200,000 more law enforcement officers. Pappas is well ahead of all comers in fundraising in the Senate race, having raised $4,284,014 and holding $2,612,761 on hand. This compares with $33,218 raised and $18,329 on hand for his sole Democratic competitor in the September 8 primary, Karishma Manzur; and $968,538 raised and $802,763 on hand for the Republican Scott Brown. (These numbers are as of end of September 2025. Numbers were not available for the second Republican, John E. Sununu, who served in the U.S. Senate from 2003 to 2009.)
Pappas’ only primary challenger, Karishma Manzur, describes herself as a doctoral degree holding medical science researcher, science writer and community volunteer, who also sits on the New Hampshire Democratic Party Rules Committee. She has included her support for workers’ rights prominently in her campaign materials, and she has called for the abolition of ICE following the killing of two demonstrators by ICE agents in Minneapolis.
The most recent polling, by Granite State Polling, from January 19, 2026, which tested Pappas against Brown, showed Pappas with a ten-point lead, 52% to Brown’s 42%. Pappas led also in the other pairing against Sununu on the same date, whom he bested by 50% to 45%. Other polling, from December 2025, shows Pappas ahead of these two competing candidates by slightly narrower, but comparable, margins. Kamala Harris defeated Donald Trump in both of New Hampshire’s congressional districts in 2024. The Cook Political Report and Inside Elections both rate New Hampshire as “leaning Democratic” coming up to the fall elections.
Assuming he succeeds in the Democratic primary on September 8th, Pappas will be vying in the general against either carpetbagger Scott Brown, former Senator from Massachusetts and ambassador to New Zealand in Trump’s first term; or John Sununu, son of a successful former governor and himself a prior holder of a New Hampshire Senate seat. Brown’s populist positions, including one of the key votes that ended the United States ban on assault weapons, earned him the opprobrium of many Massachusetts progressives. His affecting of a barn coat and pickup truck, though, won him support from the (admittedly small) right leaning constituencies in Massachusetts, and will likely sell well to the more rural New Hampshire electorate. But, there is also ample anti-Massachusetts sentiment in the state to cost Brown votes.
Sununu may represent a more serious challenge to Pappas, with his strong name recognition and long family history of public service to the state as well as his prior holding of a Senate seat. In addition, Trump recently endorsed Sununu’s candidacy. Sununu’s fundraising success thus far, though, has not been demonstrated, and his campaign also appears to have generated limited buzz.
Pappas is regarded by commentators as the front-runner for the seat. Given his strong record of favoring workers’ rights, the retrograde views of his Trump-leaning opponent Brown (and the historically solid Republican Sununu), and given the importance of winning control of the Senate for Democrats, our PAC may decide to support his candidacy.
Written by Paul Merry, SU4W Board Member
Interested in supporting the PAC as we prepare for the upcoming election cycle? Learn more and donate here.