For decades, teachers' unions have shaped education policy in the United States. Over time, however, their influence has extended far beyond classroom conditions and collective bargaining. No organization better represents that shift than the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). With roughly 1.7 million members nationwide, the AFT is not merely a professional association, but one of the most powerful political actors in the country.
In many districts, union membership is deeply embedded in school culture. Although formal compulsory union membership has been curtailed following the Supreme Court's decision in Janus v. AFSCME, which prohibits mandatory agency fees for public-sector unions, the practical reality remains that union membership provides access to legal support, liability coverage, and collective bargaining representation.
For many teachers, opting out carries professional risk. That structure preserves the union's scale, and scale translates directly into political leverage.
According to federal filings and OpenSecrets data, the AFT and its affiliates have spent tens of millions of dollars in recent election cycles on political contributions and independent expenditures. During the 2022 federal cycle alone, AFT political spending exceeded $40 million when accounting for direct contributions, outside spending, and member mobilization efforts. The overwhelming majority of those funds supported Democratic candidates and progressive ballot initiatives.
Political participation in itself is not unusual. Many large organizations endorse candidates and advocate policy positions. The concern arises when a labor union representing educators moves beyond workplace issues and functions as an ideological institution influencing students indirectly through the education system.
Recommended
In recent months, the AFT publicly amplified messaging critical of ICE, circulating "Know Your Rights" materials and framing federal immigration enforcement actions as threats to school communities. The union promoted organizing resources related to immigration enforcement and encouraged educators to prepare for ICE-related disruptions in schools.
Regardless of one's personal view on immigration policy, the question is structural: Why are teachers' unions operating as a policy advocacy hub on federal law enforcement?
While teachers are advocating for the protection of illegal immigrants, the United States faces serious educational challenges. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, often called the Nation's Report Card, only 31 percent of eighth-grade students scored at or above proficiency in reading in 2022, and just 26 percent reached proficiency in mathematics.
Chronic absenteeism surged following the pandemic; in many states, more than 30 percent of students were chronically absent during the 2022–2023 school year. These statistics reflect systemic academic decline that demands institutional focus and discipline.
When union leadership dedicates time and resources to organizing against federal immigration enforcement rather than addressing academic performance, priorities become difficult to defend. Teachers shape the tone and priorities inside a classroom. Students notice which issues schools and educators emphasize and support. In a politically divided country, that kind of influence has real and measurable effects.
The teachers' unions have also endorsed candidates whose policy agendas extend well beyond education reform. In New York, for example, the United Federation of Teachers endorsed Zohran Mamdani, a socialist who advocates expansive government programs, rent freezes, and broader redistributive economic policies. Mamdani, now mayor of New York City, won with significant support from younger voters. When a major national teachers' union aligns itself with candidates advancing sweeping economic platforms, the message sent to politically engaged students is clear and unmistakable.
Young voters are highly impressionable. According to the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University, youth turnout has increased significantly in recent election cycles, with 18–29-year-olds voting at historically elevated levels in 2018, 2020, and 2022. Civic engagement among students is not inherently problematic. The issue emerges when institutional actors embedded in K–12 systems align overwhelmingly with one ideological direction while academic fundamentals decline.
The deeper structural problem is concentration of power. Teachers' unions collectively represent millions of public-sector employees funded by taxpayers. They negotiate contracts that shape district budgets, influence curriculum discussions, and maintain lobbying operations at both the state and federal levels. When those same unions adopt expansive political agendas unrelated to core educational outcomes, accountability becomes blurred.
Education funding has increased substantially over the past several decades. Adjusted for inflation, per-pupil spending nationwide has more than doubled since the 1970s. Yet academic achievement has remained largely stagnant, and in some areas has declined. Administrative expansion, pension obligations, and negotiated benefits consume significant portions of district budgets. Meanwhile, union political expenditures continue to grow.
This imbalance reinforces the argument for structural reform. School choice policies—including charter schools, education savings accounts, and voucher programs—have expanded in states such as Florida, Arizona, and Texas. Florida's universal school choice program now makes nearly every student eligible for some form of publicly supported education funding flexibility.
Reducing the concentrated political power of teachers' unions does not require silencing educators. Rather, it requires decentralizing authority so that families, not union leadership, determine educational direction. When funding follows students rather than institutions, unions lose their ability to function as gatekeepers of public education.
Teachers' unions were originally formed to secure workplace protections and fair compensation. That purpose remains legitimate. However, when organizations like the American Federation of Teachers operate as national political advocacy networks influencing debates on immigration enforcement, endorsing ideological candidates, and investing tens of millions in partisan campaigns while academic performance falters, scrutiny becomes unavoidable.
Find similar commentary by subscribing to my Substack newsletter.
