online opt-in
Harvard CAPS/Harris
Monthly Harvard CAPS-Harris Poll: June 2025 · Jun 11–12, 2025 · US national
Methodology
- Pollster
- Harvard CAPS/Harris commercial
- Sponsor
- Harvard University Center for American Political Studies (Harvard CAPS) and The Harris Poll
- Fielded
- Jun 11–12, 2025
- Population
- registered voters
- Sample size
- 2,097
- Sample frame
- online opt-in
- Panel
- The Harris Poll online panel
- Mode
- online survey, Harris Poll online panel
- Margin of error
- not disclosed
- Weighting
- weighted for age within gender, region, race/ethnicity, marital status, household size, income, employment, political party, political ideology, and education
- Geography
- US national
- Base notes
- Topline header states 1,903 registered voters, which appears to be carried over in error from the May 2025 release; every table in the June 2025 topline shows an unweighted and weighted base of 2,097. The base of 2,097 is recorded here.
Sources
Verification note. Wording and percentages read directly from the Harvard CAPS-Harris monthly topline PDF; individual item tables were used rather than summary tables because summary-table column alignment is ambiguous in the extracted text.
Figures below are transcribed from these documents. Where they disagree with the source, the source governs.
Questions asked (3)
executive order declaring two sexes in federal forms and programs
Do you support or oppose each of these policies: Declaring that there are only two genders male and female in all government forms and programs
Wording notes: item is one of a long battery of Trump executive actions rated in a single grid | no 'not sure' option | 'genders' rather than 'sex', though the underlying executive order uses 'sex'
neutral — plain support/oppose against a compact description of the actual executive order; the surrounding battery is composed largely of high-support Trump actions, which may create a mild assimilation effect. Asked essentially unchanged from February 2025 onward, this is the single longest-running monthly trans-adjacent tracker in U.S. polling
executive order barring trans women from girls' sports
Do you support or oppose each of these policies: Banning men who have undergone operations and hormones to become women from girls' sports
Wording notes: describes trans women as 'men who have undergone operations and hormones to become women' | restricted to 'girls' sports' | assumes the athletes in question have had operations and hormones, which is not true of most school-age athletes | no 'not sure' option
tilts_restrictive — the descriptor 'men who have undergone operations and hormones to become women' assigns male category membership in the stem itself, so a respondent must accept the framing to answer; the reference to operations imports an adult surgical picture onto a question about school sports. HHP's own symmetric 2019 wording produced 51% restrictive against this item's steady 62-69%
Otherforced choice
federal spending on research about trans and LGBTQ+ populations
For each of these programs should they be left as is, should the rate of growth be reduced, or should they see significant cuts? Studies of transgender and LGBTQ+ populations
Should see significant cuts
47%
Left as is
29%
Rate of growth should be reduced
24%
Wording notes: framed inside a deficit-reduction battery, so every item is presented as a candidate for cuts | no 'increase' option is offered, making the scale one-directional | no 'not sure' option
tilts_restrictive — the response scale runs only from 'leave as is' to 'significant cuts' with no growth option, so the 47% choosing significant cuts is measured on a one-sided instrument; still one of the very few published measures of public attitudes toward federal funding of trans-population research