American Federation of Teachers Urges Nationwide Target Boycott Over Immigration Raids

America’s second-largest teacher union has urged millions to boycott Target after the company declined to publicly condemn federal immigration raids in Minneapolis, Target’s hometown.

Story Snapshot

The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) launched a nationwide Target boycott tied to Immigration and Customs Enforcement actions in Minneapolis.
AFT’s board previously passed a formal resolution backing the boycott and urging members to shop elsewhere.
AFT sent Target’s chief executive a letter in February seeking a clear stance on immigration raids; the union says Target did not do so.
Target has said it has no cooperative agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, underscoring a dispute over public messaging, not direct coordination.

What AFT Announced And Why It Matters

The American Federation of Teachers announced a new push to boycott Target ahead of back-to-school shopping. The union linked the action to a surge of federal immigration enforcement in Minneapolis this winter and Target’s lack of a public condemnation. The campaign page says, “Target won’t stand with the Twin Cities. We won’t stand at Target,” and urges members to buy school supplies elsewhere. CNBC reporting confirms the union tied the boycott to Target’s response to the local enforcement surge.

AFT leaders have repeated this demand in public statements. They argue Target’s silence failed the communities where teachers live and work. AFT President Randi Weingarten urged the company’s new chief executive to speak out. The union’s press release framed immigration actions as causing fear in schools and neighborhoods and called for a clear corporate stance. AFT’s social posts directed members to avoid Target during back-to-school shopping as part of the pressure campaign.

What Target Says And What Is Not Alleged

Local reporting indicates Target has stated it has no relationship or cooperative agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That point narrows the dispute. AFT is not claiming Target helped federal agents. The union is pressing for a public statement condemning enforcement tactics in Minneapolis. The difference matters. The conflict is about corporate speech and values, not a proven operational tie to immigration enforcement. That limits the scope of what the boycott seeks to change.

AFT put its position into formal policy last year. A 2025 union resolution affirms support for a national Target boycott and urges members to refrain from shopping there. In February 2026, AFT sent a letter to Target’s chief executive asking the company to “clearly state” its position after winter enforcement actions in the Twin Cities. The union’s campaign materials and letters establish a paper trail showing this is a planned and sustained corporate pressure effort.

How This Fits A Larger Pattern Of Corporate Pressure

Advocacy groups often target brands with strong public identities to push for change. Academic work on consumer boycotts shows that results vary. Some boycotts dent sales or brand value, while others fade or spark offsetting “buycotts.” What tends to matter is how credible the threat is and how widely it spreads. Studies of past United States boycotts find measurable effects on shareholder value on average, though the impact is uneven across cases.

AFT just launched a nationwide BACK-TO-SCHOOL BOYCOTT of Target—because the retailer didn't condemn ICE in Minnesota

But AFT members' pensions own 6.79 MILLION Target shares! We're asking teachers to boycott a company their own retirement depends on

This is how we lose trust! pic.twitter.com/rRjHfz79e8

— David Hinkle (@DavidHinkle90) August 25, 2026

This case also reflects a rise in unions using corporate campaigns when they feel lawmakers are unresponsive. When Congress and the White House are locked in partisan fights, activists often move the contest to the market. They pressure firms whose hometown ties or customer base make them sensitive to public sentiment. Here, Minneapolis is both a symbol and a stake. AFT argues a major hometown employer should speak clearly about policing and immigration in its own backyard.

What To Watch Next

Target’s next steps will shape the story. A direct corporate statement on immigration enforcement in Minneapolis could alter the pressure. The company’s prior note that it has no cooperative agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement addresses coordination, not values. AFT’s campaign is timed to back-to-school purchases, when parents and teachers spend more. Researchers say timing and credibility can boost boycott impact, at least in the short run.