Since we published this article, THE EASTON GAZETTE has been sent information from various counties which documents TEACHERS' UNIONS and PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEMS violating state law regarding supporting partisan candidates using school resources/time. Here is an EMAIL sent from the CECIL COUNTY CLASSROOM TEACHERS ASSOCIATION. This email came through the Cecil County Public Schools email system to employees. Notice the highlighted section regarding WHO makes endorsement choices: (Hint: It's not all of the paying members)
And here is the graphic of who the "educators" of the system recommend:
Original Story:
The Easton Gazette received an email regarding the political activities of the Worcester County Public Schools. The email included this letter from a resident of the county:
Please follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Truth Social, Gettr, Twitter, Youtube
The letter alleges that the school placed or allowed campaign material connected to a candidate for county commissioner to be placed into teachers' school mailboxes within Worcester County Public Schools. The materials allegedly urge teachers to support certain candidates including this candidate and others and also have instructions for changing party affiliation.
As the letter states, this action could possibly pressure public school employees to feel that they must support a candidate who was once a system employee. Also, public schools, along with other public institutions, are supposed to remain politically neutral. Certainly, public materials and time should not be spent on political campaigns. One of the documents references a "building rep" which most likely refers to a "union" rep.
Again, these are allegations. However, they do bring up some important questions.
What is the law in Maryland regarding using school communications to promote candidates?
Maryland law prohibits teachers’ unions and any other group from using public school communication systems to promote or oppose political candidates, because doing so constitutes political activity using government resources, which is barred under both state ethics rules as well as federal tax rules for labor organizations such as teacher's unions
Below is a precise, statute‑grounded breakdown.
Here is what the law says:
Maryland school systems are government entities. Using school communication channels (email systems, internal newsletters, staff listservs, PA systems, student take‑home folders, etc.) to promote or oppose candidates is considered misuse of government property for political purposes.
The laws addressing this are found in MARYLAND PUBLIC ETHICS LAWS. All districts are bound by Md. Code, Education Art. §7-108 (no school resources for political activities) and COMAR 19A.05.01.01–.03 (mandatory ethics policy approved by State Ethics Commission). Every district has an Ethics Panel, though Kent County's has only 3 members (smallest in Maryland) versus the typical 5.
The Maryland Public Employee Relation Act (HB 983, 2023) also prohibits unions from using school communication systems for political purposes. It preserves existing prohibitions on unfair labor practices and misuse of employer resources.
Here are the other handouts that were placed in teachers' mailboxes in the schools:
The "building rep" referenced in the document most likely refers to the teachers' union rep.
Unions cannot use school materials or time for political advocacy. They may only use their own communication channels such as email lists (not school generated), newsletters, websites, and private meetings for political causes.
Unions may endorse candidates and engage in political advocacy, but only through their own channels (union email lists, union newsletters, union websites, private meetings). The following chart gives examples of what is and isn't allowed.
| Activity | Allowed? | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Union endorses candidates in its own newsletter | ✔️ Allowed | Private union communication; not using school resources |
| Union uses school email system to promote a candidate | ❌ Prohibited | Misuse of government resources for political activity |
| Principal or teacher uses school email to share union political endorsements | ❌ Prohibited | Public employees cannot use official channels for campaigning |
| Union distributes political flyers through student folders or school mailboxes | ❌ Prohibited | School distribution systems are public resources |
Federal law also restricts political use of government resources. Teachers' unions are 501(c)(5) organizations and are therefore allowed to engage in political activity. However, public schools receive federal funds. Using school resources for partisan activity violates the HATCH ACT which restricts government resources on political activities and IRS rules which prohibit public entities from engaging in political campaign intervention.
Each county system has their own specific school district’s ethics policy. Whether the documents referenced above violate ethics and Maryland or Federal law would have to be decided by the county's ethics panel.
Other Counties
Worcester isn't the only county where the schools and unions seem intent on asserting political influence, whether it is by ethical methods or not. They will not only admit it, but many will also defend it.
For example, here is a report from Baltimore FOX 45 regarding a recent Harford County Education Association directive to members:
Maryland teachers union urges Democratic members 'flip' to Republican to 'impact' election
Harford County teachers' union urges political party flip, no mention of student benefit
If one thinks this is new, remember that the Teachers' Unions have been using less than honorable tactics regarding politics especially during elections. For example, The Easton Gazette wrote about the union donations to politicians in 2024:
The National Education Association has assets of over $400 million and almost 3 million members. What’s odd is that their assets have increased while membership has dropped. The percentages that describe how these millions are spent is also interesting. The biggest category is “contributions, gifts and grants” which is 27.45%. The next category is Union Administration, which is 12.19%. Union employees come in at 9.92%, which is nearly the same as what they spent on “representational activities,” which is 10.09% or 10 cents on every dollar. Lobbying and political comes in at 8.69% but if combined with those mysterious contributions and gifts makes up over 36% of the total expenditures. Rounding out the larger categories are General Overhead and Union Administration. at 12.3% and 12.1%.
What is also interesting is that over 60 million or 76% of political donations go to DEMOCRAT politicians at the Federal level. At the State level it’s 128 million of which 86% goes to DEMOCRATS and 14% goes to Republicans. In Maryland, the picture is even more bleak for Republicans as the union gives 98% of donations to Democrats and 2% to Republicans.
And because the unions work hard to hide donations, this does not include all the various Political Action Committees they have created. Any Mafia Don would be proud. For example, if you see the donor “MSEA Fund for Children and Public Education” on the list of donors to a candidate, that is the Union.
The endorsement processes the unions use may concern paying members:
Who Decides Maryland State Education Association Apple Endorsements? - The Easton Gazette
The article goes on to point out how a small, elite group of union members decides who will get the endorsement (from their own description):
In this “fair, open, process” there is no direct vote from Union membership to decide endorsements. This is left to an elite group selected to a council. And then, the candidate must receive only 58% of their vote. So, slightly over HALF of the elite council has to vote to endorse a candidate.
Not very representative of the teachers who are dues paying members of the union. In fact, every time an endorsement goes out, we get emails from members who wonder why they were never asked.
Locally, we have had school board candidates who have participated in the endorsement "interview" process with the education association. Conservative candidates who have participated in process describe a mostly disinterested panel asking questions and listening to answers when they were interviewed. One candidate told us that they could tell from the moment they stepped into the room that they didn't stand a chance of a union endorsement. They said it was almost comical.
We have also heard from candidates that even though they didn't participate in the union vetting process, they got an endorsement. It was one the candidate didn't want. But, because the candidate had a "D" next to their name, the union endorsed them.
And, just because the union is a local or state chapter, don't think for a moment that they won't get down and dirty with election tactics. Here is an article we wrote during the last election cycle:
This recent incident in Worcester County could be considered mild in the arena of election interference. Certainly, the one in Harford County is much more specious. Unions, like other organizations have learned how to walk the thin line between what is ethical and what is not. They have also learned how to ignore their core mission, the needs of their members and reason they exist.
It seems like desperation. At any rate, anyone finding examples of this kind of electioneering by unions or in public schools should report it to their local ethics commission or Board of Elections.
Resources:
Maryland Democrat Party Throws Temper Tantrum Over School Board Candidates - The Easton Gazette
