How US adults' views on same-sex marriage have changed since the Supreme Court's 2015 ruling
WASHINGTON (AP) — For years, it looked as though the United States was steadily climbing toward a consensus on same-sex marriage. But 10 years after the Supreme Court ruled that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, the split between Republicans and Democrats on the issue is wider than it's been in decades.
Recent polling from Gallup shows that Americans' support for same-sex marriage is higher than it was in 2015. Gallup's latest data, however, finds a 47-percentage-point gap on the issue between Republicans and Democrats, the largest since it first began tracking this measure 29 years ago.
The size of that chasm is partially due to a substantial dip in support among Republicans since 2023.
An Associated Press polling analysis shows how same-sex marriage shifted from a clear minority position to a stance with broad support — and what the future could hold for views on the issue.
Same-sex marriage was once highly unpopular
Less than 40 years ago, same-sex marriage was a deeply unpopular issue.
In 1988, The General Social Survey showed that just about 1 in 10 U.S. adults 'strongly agreed' or 'agreed' with a statement that gay couples should have the right to marry. At that point, roughly 7 in 10 Americans — including similar shares of Democrats and Republicans — disagreed with the statement.
But as early as the 1990s, the politics of same-sex marriage were shifting. Gallup data from 1996 — the year the Defense of Marriage Act defined marriage as between one man and one woman — showed that 27% of U.S. adults said marriages between same-sex partners 'should be recognized by the law as valid.' But Democrats and Republicans weren't in lockstep anymore: Democrats were nearly twice as likely as Republicans to support legal recognition of same-sex marriages.
Democrats' support for same-sex marriage shifted faster
By 2004, the legalization of same-sex marriage started to unfold at the state level. That year, Massachusetts became the first state to allow same-sex couples to marry. President George W. Bush, a Republican, championed a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage on the campaign trail, while Democrats vying for their party's 2004 presidential nomination said the legalization of same-sex marriage should be left to the states.
At this time, Americans' support for same-sex marriage was still somewhat limited, and the divide between Republicans and Democrats deepened. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults agreed that same-sex marriage should be permitted, according to the Gallup data. Among Democrats, that agreement was higher — about half were in favor — compared with 22% of Republicans.
Since then, Americans' upward movement on support for same-sex marriage has been driven by Democrats and independents. Throughout Gallup's trend, Democrats have been more supportive of same-sex marriage than Republicans have. Since 2006, at least half of Democrats have supported same-sex marriage, and independents started to see consistent majority support in 2012.
The gap between Democrats and Republicans, meanwhile, stayed wide. By 2015, the year of the Supreme Court's ruling, about three-quarters of Democrats — but only about one-third of Republicans — supported same-sex marriage.
But Republicans did become somewhat more supportive of same-sex marriage between 2010 and 2020. While Democrats continued to lead the shift, Republican public opinion also moved during this decade — signaling a broader movement toward acceptance of same-sex marriage across party lines, even if it wasn't always linear.
Republicans' support for same-sex marriage dropped in recent years
About 7 in 10 Americans think marriages between same-sex partners should be recognized by the law as valid, according to Gallup data from this year, which is similar to the latest General Social Survey data showing 63% of U.S. adults agree that same-sex marriage should be considered a right.
But while the public's support for same-sex marriage ticked up in the years following the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling — from about 60% in 2015 — it has been relatively steady since 2020.
At the same time, Republicans' support has fallen in each of the past three years. Now, about 4 in 10 Republicans say marriages between same-sex partners should be recognized as legal, down from a record high of 55% in 2021 and 2022. This latest decline by Republicans returns their views to their 2016 measure, when 40% supported legal same-sex marriage.
Gallup Senior Editor Megan Brenan said Republicans' recent shift in opinion on same-sex marriage is dramatic.
'This was a much steeper fall from 2022 through 2025,' she said. 'And now, of course, we have the widest partisan gap that we've seen in the trends.'
Younger and older Republicans split on same-sex marriage
Even as overall Republican support for same-sex marriage declines, a generational split within the party suggests that opposition may not hold in the long run.
Among Republicans under age 50, about 6 in 10 say same-sex marriages should be legally recognized, the Gallup poll finds. That stands in stark contrast to just 36% of Republicans over 50 who say the same —- suggesting that views on the issue could continue to shift.
Overall, younger adults are significantly more likely to support legal recognition of same-sex marriage. About 8 in 10 adults under 35 are in favor, compared with roughly 7 in 10 between ages 35 and 54 and 6 in 10 among those 55 or older.
Brenan noted that younger Americans are more accepting of same-sex marriage than older adults are, and it's an issue that especially appears to divide Republicans today.
'I think that's a key to where things will be headed, presumably,' Brenan said. 'Historically, people have become more conservative as they age, but this is an issue that's so ingrained in society today and especially younger society.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
34 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Senators launch a weekend of work to meet Trump's deadline for passing his tax and spending cuts
WASHINGTON — The Senate launched a rare weekend session Saturday as Republicans race to pass President Donald Trump's package of tax breaks, spending cuts and bolstered deportation funds by his July Fourth deadline. Republicans are using their majorities in Congress to push aside Democratic opposition, but they have run into a series of political and policy setbacks. Not all GOP lawmakers are on board with proposals to reduce spending on Medicaid, food stamps and other programs as a way to help cover the cost of extending some $3.8 trillion in Trump tax breaks. The 940-page bill was released shortly before midnight Friday. Senators are expected to grind through the days ahead with procedural vote Saturday to begin considering the legislation, but the timing was uncertain. There would still be a long path ahead, with hours of potentially all-night debate and eventually voting on countless amendments. Senate passage could be days away, and the bill would need to return to the House for a final round of votes before it could reach the White House. Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, opened the day's session with an impassioned defense of the package that he said has been misrepresented by its critics. 'Here's what American workers get out of 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' Moreno said as he began outlining the provisions. 'Read it for yourself.' The weekend session could be a make-or-break moment for Trump's party, which has invested much of its political capital on his signature domestic policy plan. Trump is pushing Congress to wrap it up, even as he sometimes gives mixed signals, allowing for more time. At recent events at the White House, including Friday, Trump has admonished the 'grandstanders' among GOP holdouts to fall in line. 'We can get it done,' Trump said in a social media post. 'It will be a wonderful Celebration for our Country.' The legislation is an ambitious but complicated series of GOP priorities. At its core, it would make permanent many of the tax breaks from Trump's first term that would otherwise expire by year's end if Congress fails to act, resulting in a potential tax increase on Americans. The bill would add new breaks, including no taxes on tips, and commit $350 billion to national security, including for Trump's mass deportation agenda. But the spending cuts that Republicans are relying on to offset the lost tax revenues are causing dissent within the GOP ranks. Some lawmakers say the cuts go too far, particularly for people receiving health care through Medicaid. Meanwhile, conservatives, worried about the nation's debt, are pushing for steeper cuts. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said he remains concerned about the fundamentals of the package and will not support the procedural motion to begin debate. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., pushing for deeper cuts, said he needed to see the final legislative text. With the narrow Republicans majorities in the House and Senate, leaders need almost every lawmaker on board to ensure passage. The release of that draft had been delayed as the Senate parliamentarian reviewed the bill to ensure it complied with the chamber's strict 'Byrd Rule,' named for the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd, It largely bars policy matters from inclusion in budget bills unless a provision can get 60 votes to overcome objections. That would be a tall order in a Senate with a 53-47 GOP edge and Democrats unified against Trump's bill. Republicans suffered a series of setbacks after several proposals were determined to be out of compliance by the chief arbiter of the Senate's rules. One plan would have shifted some food stamp costs from the federal government to the states; a second would have gutted the funding structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. But over the past days, Republicans have quickly revised those proposals and reinstated them. The final text includes a proposal for cuts to a Medicaid provider tax that had run into parliamentary objections and opposition from several senators worried about the fate of rural hospitals. The new version extends the start date for those cuts and establishes a $25 billion fund to aid rural hospitals and providers. Most states impose the provider tax as a way to boost federal Medicaid reimbursements. Some Republicans argue that is a scam and should be abolished. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that under the House-passed version of the bill, some 10.9 million more people would go without health care and at least 3 million fewer would qualify for food aid. The CBO has not yet publicly assessed the Senate draft, which proposes steeper reductions. Top income-earners would see about a $12,000 tax cut under the House bill, while the package would cost the poorest Americans $1,600, the CBO said. The Senate included a compromise over the so-called SALT provision, a deduction for state and local taxes that has been a top priority of lawmakers from New York and other high-tax states, but the issue remains unsettled. The current SALT cap is $10,000 a year, and a handful of Republicans wanted to boost it to $40,000 a year. The final draft includes a $40,000 cap, but for five years instead of 10. Many Republican senators say that is still too generous. At least one House GOP holdout, Rep. Nick LaLota of New York, had said that would be insufficient. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Republicans dropped the bill 'in the dead of night' and are rushing to finish the bill before the public fully knows what's in it. House Speaker Mike Johnson, who sent his colleagues home for the weekend with plans to be on call to return to Washington, had said they are 'very close' to finishing up. 'We would still like to meet that July Fourth, self-imposed deadline,' said Johnson, R-La. Johnson and Thune have stayed close to the White House, relying on Trump to pressure holdout lawmakers.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Jesse Watters' New Nickname For Zohran Mamdani Makes Him Sound Ridiculously Cool
Fox News host Jesse Watters has unveiled a new nickname for New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani — and people can't help but notice it makes him sound really, really cool. Over the past few days, the commentator has referred to the progressive rising star as 'Zohran the Destroyer,' or simply 'the destroyer,' multiple times. In a viral screenshot from Thursday's episode of 'Jesse Watters Primetime,' a chyron reads, 'ZOHRAN THE DESTROYER WRECKS DEM PARTY.' The segment touched on angst from some Democrats over Mamdani threatening the status quo. The democratic socialist beat former New York Gov. and accused sexual harasser Andrew Cuomo in New York City's Democratic mayoral primary on Tuesday in a stunning upset. 'What's Zohran the Destroyer got going for him?' Watters asked in a monologue that trashed Mamdani's policy proposals and mocked his supporters. He also called him a 'smooth-talking assassin.' On 'The Five' on Friday, Watters mused, 'Zohran the Destroyer is about to give Karl Marx a woke makeover, if Democrats can't stop him from becoming the next mayor of New York City.' On social media, people joked about how awesome the moniker made Mamdani sound. They're giving him cool nicknames now — pokey pup (@Whatapityonyou) June 27, 2025 Problem? — Austin MacNamara - Gremloe (@gremloe) June 28, 2025 omw to Join the Praetorian Guard of Zohran the Destroyer — Estrie⚢🔆 (@AdorableEstrie) June 28, 2025 I'm sorry @ZohranKMamdani, but I will only be referring to you by your full name from now on: Zohran The Destroyer. — Deliver The Food (@deliverthefred) June 27, 2025 They try to make him sound scary and just make him sound like a hero."Hither came Zohran, black-haired, bright-eyed, sword in hand, a reaver, a billionaire-slayer, with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandaled feet." — Josiah Hawthorne (@JosiahHawthorne) June 27, 2025 Zohran Mamdani Stuns Andrew Cuomo In NYC Mayoral Primary Marjorie Taylor Greene And Tucker Carlson Offer Surprising Praise For Rising Dem Star Democrats Hope They Can Replicate Zohran Mamdani, Just Without The Socialism
Politico
41 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump pollster warns Senate GOP against deeper Medicaid cuts
Senate Republicans released updated megabill text late Friday that would make sharp cuts to the Inflation Reduction Act's solar and wind tax credits after a late-stage push by President Donald Trump to crack down further on the incentives. The text would require solar and wind generation projects seeking to qualify for the law's clean electricity production and investment tax credits to be placed in service by the end of 2027 — significantly more restrictive than an earlier proposal by the Senate Finance Committee that tied eligibility to when a project begins construction. The changes came after Trump urged Senate Majority Leader John Thune to crack down on the wind and solar credits and align the measure more closely with reconciliation text, H.R.1, that passed the House, as POLITICO reported earlier on Friday. The changes are likely to put some moderate GOP senators, who have backed a slower schedule for sunsetting those incentives, in a tough position. They'll be forced to choose between rejecting Trump's agenda or allowing the gutting of tax credits that could lead to canceled projects and job losses in their states — something renewable energy advocates are also warning about. 'We are literally going to have not enough electricity because Trump is killing solar. It's that serious,' Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) responded on X early Saturday. 'We need a bunch of new power on the grid, and nothing is as available as solar. Everything else takes a while. Meantime, expect shortages and high prices. Stupid.' The revised text would retain the investment and production tax credits for baseload sources, such as nuclear, geothermal, hydropower or energy storage, as proposed in the Finance Committee's earlier proposal. But it would make other significant changes, including extending a tax credit for clean hydrogen production until 2028. The panel's earlier proposal would have eliminated the credit after this year. And despite vocal lobbying by the solar industry, the proposal would maintain an abrupt cut to the tax incentive supporting residential solar power. The committee's earlier proposal would have eliminated that credit six months after the enactment of the bill; now the updated draft proposes repealing it at the end of this year. It would also deny certain wind and solar leasing arrangements from accessing the climate law's clean electricity investment and production tax credits, but, in a notable change, removed earlier language specifically disallowing rooftop solar. And it would move up the timeline for certain rules barring foreign entities of concern from accessing those credits. The bill would move up the termination date for electric vehicle tax credits to Sept. 30, compared to six months after enactment in the earlier Finance text. The credit for EV chargers would extend through June 2026. The new text also provides a bonus incentive for advanced nuclear facilities built in communities with high levels of employment in the nuclear industry. And the bill makes metallurgical coal eligible for the advanced manufacturing production tax credit through 2029. Sam Ricketts, co-founder of S2 Strategies, a clean energy policy consulting group, said the new draft is going to 'screw' ratepayers, kill jobs and undermine U.S. economic competitiveness. 'All just to give fossil fuel executives more profits,' he said. 'Or to own the libs. Insanity.' Josh Siegel contributed to this report.
