Major split in US education unions as NEA blasts, AFT backs parental rights ruling by Supreme Court

In a rare and public divide, the two largest teachers unions in the US—representing nearly 5 million educators combined—have taken opposing stances on a major Supreme Court decision involving parental rights and LGBTQ-themed content in public school curricula.

The 6-3 ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor allows parents in Maryland to opt their children out of classroom lessons that include LGBTQ topics if such material conflicts with their religious beliefs.The case has not only stirred debate across the country but also exposed fault lines within the leadership of the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), two organizations that traditionally align closely on education policy and political matters.Union leaders react sharply to landmark rulingNEA President Becky Pringle sharply criticized the decision, claiming it undermines professional educators and harms students. As reported by Fox News, Pringle posted on BlueSky, “Students pay the price when books are censored and educators are silenced.” She added that the court had “failed students” and “ignored the expertise of trained educational professionals,” calling the ruling “shameful.”

The NEA, which represents more than 3 million educators, has long opposed efforts to restrict access to books or materials that reflect LGBTQ identities and experiences.In contrast, AFT President Randi Weingarten expressed a more nuanced position, emphasizing the importance of parental involvement and local decision-making. According to Fox News, Weingarten said, “We have to respect all children and all families.

Bad facts make bad law. Mahmoud should have been worked out on a local level, it’s a shame it went all the way to SCOTUS.” She added, “Parents must have a say about their own kids—they are our partners in education.

”

Weingarten had echoed similar sentiments earlier this year during oral arguments, telling Fox News, “This is something that has to be happening at the local level and not in the Supreme Court,” and noted that the books in question are not ones she would personally read to children.Unions typically united on social issuesBoth Pringle and Weingarten have historically shared political alignment, having endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential race. The current divide is notable given their longstanding opposition to conservative-led education policies, including book bans and curriculum restrictions.Despite her statement supporting parental input, Weingarten has previously pushed back on book challenges.

In 2023, she launched the “Freedom to Teach and Learn” hotline to report attempts at banning educational content, accusing “MAGA lawmakers” of using “culture wars to divide communities,” as reported by Fox News.Other Supreme Court decisions announcedThe Mahmoud v. Taylor decision was one of several education-related rulings announced the same day. While details of other cases were not immediately available, the court’s docket indicated a focus on First Amendment concerns and the balance between public education standards and religious liberties.

This split between the NEA and AFT highlights growing tensions within US education policy—where cultural, legal, and parental rights debates continue to challenge traditional alliances and educational norms.