probability panel
Marquette Law School Poll
Marquette Law School Poll national survey · Dec 2–11, 2024 · US national
Methodology
- Pollster
- Marquette Law School Poll academic
- Sponsor
- Marquette University Law School
- Fielded
- Dec 2–11, 2024
- Population
- adults
- Sample size
- 1,063
- Sample frame
- probability panel
- Panel
- SSRS Opinion Panel
- Mode
- online probability panel (SSRS Opinion Panel)
- Margin of error
- ±3.6 percentage points
- Geography
- US national
Sources
Verification note. Toplines read from Marquette's MLSPSC23 topline HTML; party breaks from Marquette's MLSPSC23 crosstab file ('party ID, leaners as partisans'). Sample size and MOE from Marquette's own release. || Wording and toplines read directly from the Marquette release. No party breakdowns published on the release page. || Release page retrieved and text-extracted in session; Table 21 read directly. Marquette did not publish a party breakdown for this item in the release text.
Figures below are transcribed from these documents. Where they disagree with the source, the source governs.
Questions asked (6)
Bostock v. Clayton County - workplace protections for gay and transgender workers
In 2020 the Supreme Court ruled that a federal civil rights law protects gay and transgender workers from workplace discrimination. How much do you favor or oppose this decision?
Wording notes: bundles sexual orientation and gender identity into one item | describes an existing Court holding rather than an abstract policy
neutral — Neutral description of the holding; 'favor or oppose this decision' is symmetric. Because gay and transgender workers are bundled, the item cannot isolate attitudes toward gender identity alone.
Subgroup figures (12)
policy proposal: require transgender athletes to compete on teams matching sex assigned at birth (4-point)
[Require that transgender athletes compete on teams that match the sex they were assigned at birth, not the gender they identify with] Which of the following proposals would you favor and which would you oppose?
Wording notes: uses 'the sex they were assigned at birth' | restrictive alternative is the only one stated
neutral — Only the restrictive proposal is described; respondents favor or oppose it.
Subgroup figures (12)
policy proposal: ban gender-affirming care such as hormone therapy or surgery for minors under 18 (4-point)
[Ban "gender-affirming" care such as hormone therapy or surgery for transgender minors under 18] Which of the following proposals would you favor and which would you oppose?
Wording notes: scare quotes around "gender-affirming" | names hormone therapy and surgery but not puberty blockers | restrictive alternative is the only one stated
neutral — Scare-quoting 'gender-affirming' signals contestation; only the ban is described.
Subgroup figures (12)
requiring trans athletes to compete on teams matching sex assigned at birth
Do you favor or oppose each of the following policies?
Require that transgender athletes compete on teams that match the sex they were assigned at birth, not the gender they identify with
Wording notes: uses 'sex they were assigned at birth' | uses 'transgender athletes' (not 'biological males') | no middle option offered | level of sport not specified
neutral — policy stated in its own terms; 'assigned at birth' is the affirming-side term of art
ban on gender-affirming care for minors
Do you favor or oppose each of the following policies?
Ban "gender-affirming" care such as hormone therapy or surgery for transgender minors under 18
Wording notes: puts 'gender-affirming' in scare quotes | no middle option offered
loaded_terms — the scare quotes around "gender-affirming" signal skepticism about the term
under 18; 'gender-affirming' care in scare quotes, exemplified as hormone therapy or surgery; BAN framing as a policy proposal
Which of the following proposals would you favor and which would you oppose?
Which of the following proposals would you favor and which would you oppose? [item] Ban "gender-affirming" care such as hormone therapy or surgery for transgender minors under 18
Wording notes: places 'gender-affirming' in scare quotes, signaling distance from the term inside the stimulus | bundles hormone therapy with surgery | BAN direction (favor = restrict) | no middle option published | asked in a battery alongside a trans-athletes item and a parental-medical-decision item
loaded_terms — Scare-quoting 'gender-affirming' marks the term as contested inside the stimulus itself, a cue no neutral wording carries; bundling surgery with hormone therapy raises the restrictive share. Placement right after a parental-autonomy item may cross-pressure in the other direction. The 61% favor here sits ten points below this same house's Supreme Court framing seven months later, on substantively the same restriction.