What are the effects of judicial action and policy implementation on attitude change? The previous literature indicates that attitudes may change, but there is some debate about its direction. According to some theories, legislation or litigation should strike a backlash, resulting in greater disapproval of the issue. Other perspectives contend that these acts reflect consensus, legitimate, or polarize the issue. We analyze panel data on attitudes toward same-sex marriage and feelings toward lesbians and gay men. In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court made historic decisions on same-sex marriage, and residents in some states had same-sex marriage legalized. Given this variation, we decompose the multiple pathways attitudes change among residents in different policy contexts over time. We find that residents of states that had same-sex marriage policy introduced had the greatest reduction of anti-gay attitudes. We consider consensus and legitimacy as most applicable and provide minimal indication of backlash or polarization.
AbadieAlberto. 2005. “Semiparametric Difference-in-Differences Estimators.” Review of Economic Studies72:1–19.
2.
AlvarezR. MichaelBrehmJohn. 1995. “American Ambivalence towards Abortion Policy: Development of a Heteroskedastic Probit Model of Competing Values.” American Journal of Political Science39 (4): 1055–82.
3.
AlvarezR. MicahelBrehmJohn. 1997. “Are Americans Ambivalent towards Racial Policies.” American Journal of Political Science41 (2): 345–74.
4.
AlvarezR. MichaelBrehmJohn. 2002. Hard Choices, Easy Answers: Values, Information, and American Public Opinion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
5.
AnsolabehereStephenRoddenJonathanSnyderJames M.Jr. 2008. “The Strength of Issues: Using Multiple Measures to Gauge Preference Stability, Ideological Constraint, and Issue Voting.” American Political Science Review102 (2): 215–32.
6.
BallCarlos A.2009. “Symposium: Updating the LGBT Intracommunity Debate over Same-Sex Marriage: Introduction.” Rutgers Law Review61 (3): 493–505.
7.
BarnesJebBurke.Thomas F.2006. “The Diffusion of Rights: From Law on the Books to Organizational Practices.” Law & Society Review40 (3): 493–524.
8.
BaumgartnerFrank R.Jones.Bryan D. (1993) 2009. Agendas and Instability in American Politics. 2nd ed.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9.
BirklandThomas A.1997. After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy, and Focusing Events. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
10.
BishinBenjamin G.2009. Tyranny of the Minority: The Subconstituency Politics Theory of Representation. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
11.
BishinBenjamin G.HayesThomas J.IncantalupoMatthew B.SmithCharles Anthony. 2015. “Opinion Backlash and Public Attitudes: Are Institutional Advances in Gay Rights Counterproductive?” American Journal of Political Science. Published electronically April28. doi:10.1111/ajps.12181
12.
BlaydesLisaLinzer.Drew A.2008. “The Political Economy of Women’s Support for Fundamentalist Islam.” World Politics60 (4): 576–609.
13.
BreenRichard. 2000. “Why Is Support for Extreme Parties Underestimated by Surveys? A Latent Class Analysis.” British Journal of Political Science30 (2): 375–82.
14.
BursteinPaul. 2003. “The Impact of Public Opinion on Public Policy: A Review and an Agenda.” Political Research Quarterly56 (1): 29–40.
15.
ButeraNicole M.LanzaStephanie T.Coffman.Donna L.2014. “A Framework for Estimating Causal Effects in Latent Class Analysis: Is There a Causal Link between Early Sex and Subsequent Profiles of Delinquency?” Prevention Science15 (3): 397–407.
16.
CaldeiraGregory C.1987. “Public Opinion and U.S. Supreme Court: FDR’s Court-packing Plan.” American Political Science Review81 (4): 1209–26.
17.
Canes-WroneBrandiceClarkTom S.Kelly.Jason P.2014. “Judicial Selection and Death Penalty Decisions.” American Political Science Review108 (1): 23–39.
18.
CarminesEdward G.Stimson.James A.1981. “Issue Evolution, Population Replacement, and Normal Partisan Change.” American Political Science Review75 (1): 107–18.
19.
CarminesEdward G.Stimson.James A.1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
20.
CasillasChristopherEnnsPeter K.Wohlfarth.Patrick C.2011. “How Public Opinion Constrains the U.S. Supreme Court.” American Journal of Political Science55 (1): 74–88.
21.
CollinsLinda M.2006. “Analysis of Longitudinal Data: The Integration of Theoretical Model, Temporal Design, and Statistical Model.” Annual Review of Psychology57:505–28.
22.
CraigStephen C.MartinezMichael D.KaneJames G.GainousJason. 2005. “Core Values, Value Conflict, and Citizens’ Ambivalence about Gay Rights.” Political Research Quarterly58 (1): 5–17.
23.
DahlRobert A.1957. “Decision-making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker.” Journal of Public Law6 (Fall): 279–95.
24.
Defense of Marriage Act. 1996. Statutes at Large. Vol. 110, sec. 3, p. 2419-20.
25.
DonovanToddWenzelJimBowlerShaun. 2000. “Direct Democracy and Gay Rights Initiatives after Romer (pp.161-90).” In The Politics of Gay Rights, edited by RimmermanCraig A.WaldKenneth D.WilcoxClyde. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26.
DuGoffEva H.SchulerMeganStuart.Elizabeth A.2014. “Generalizing Observational Study Results: Applying Propensity Score Methods to Complex Surveys.” Health Services Research49 (1): 284–303.
27.
EriksonRobert S.WrightGerald C.McIver.John P.1993. Statehouse Democracy: Public Opinion and Policy in the American States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
28.
EttelbrickPaula L.1997. “Since When Is Marriage a Path to Liberation?” In We Are Everywhere: A Historical Sourcebook of Gay and Lesbian Politics, edited by BalsiusMarkPhelanShan, 757–61. New York: Routledge.
29.
EwickPatriciaSilbey.Susan S.1995. “Subversive Stories and Hegemonic Tales: Toward a Sociology of Narrative.” Law & Society Review29 (2): 197–226.
30.
EwickPatriciaSilbey.Susan S.1998. The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
31.
EwickPatriciaSilbey.Susan S.2003. “Narrating Social Structure: Stories of Resistance to Legal Authority.” American Journal of Sociology108 (6): 1328–72.
32.
FeickLawrence F.1989. “Latent Class Analysis of Survey Questions that Include Don’t Know Responses.” Public Opinion Quarterly53 (4): 525–47.
33.
FlemmingRoy B.BohteJohnWoodB. Dan. 1997. “One Voice among Many: The Supreme Court’s Influence on Attentiveness to Issues in the United States, 1947-92.” American Journal of Political Science41 (4): 1224–50.
34.
FongChristianRatkovicMarcImaiKosuke. 2014. CBPS: R Package for Covariate Balancing Propensity Score. R package version 0.8. http://CRAN.r-project.org/package=CBPS (accessed November 25, 2015).
35.
FranklinCharles H.Kosaki.Liane C.1989. “Republican Schoolmaster: The U.S. Supreme Court, Public Opinion, and Abortion.” American Political Science Review83 (3): 751–71.
36.
GarnerAndrew. 2013. “Ambivalence, the Intergroup Contact Hypothesis, and Attitudes about Gay Rights.” Politics & Policy41(2): 241-66.
37.
GerberAlan S.GimpelJames G.GreenDonald P.Shaw.Daron R.2011. “How Large and Long-lasting Are the Persuasive Effects of Televised Campaign Ads? Results from a Randomized Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review105 (1): 135–50.
38.
GossettCharles W.1999. “Dillon’s Rule and Gay Rights: State Control over Local Efforts to Protect the Rights of Lesbians and Gay Men (pp. 62-88).” In Gays and Lesbians in the Democratic Process, edited by RiggleEllen D. B.Tadlock.Barry L.New York: Columbia University Press.
39.
GreenJohn C.2000. “Antigay: Varieties of Opposition to Gay Rights (pp. 121-38).” In The Politics of Gay Rights, edited by RimmermanCraig A.WaldKenneth D.WilcoxClyde. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40.
GreenhouseLindaSiegel.Reva B.2011. “Before (and after) Roe v. Wade: New Questions about Backlash.” Yale Law Journal120:2028–87.
41.
HabermasJurgen. 1998. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42.
Haider-MarkelDonald P.2007. “Representation and Backlash: The Positive and Negative Influence of Descriptive Representation.” Legislative Studies Quarterly32 (1): 107–33.
43.
HanleyJohnSalamoneMichaelWrightMatthew. 2012. “Reviving the Schoolmaster: Reevaluating Public Opinion in the Wake of Roe v. Wade.” Political Research Quarterly65 (2): 408–21.
44.
HillJennifer L.KriesiHanspeter. 2001a. “An Extension and Test of Converse’s ‘Black-and-White’ Model of Response Stability.” American Political Science Review95 (2): 397–413.
45.
HillJennifer L.KriesiHanspeter. 2001b. “Classification by Opinion-Changing Behavior: A Mixture Model Approach.” Political Analysis9 (4): 301–24.
46.
HillSeth J.LoJamesVavreckLynnZallerJohn. 2013. “How Quickly We Forget: The Duration of Persuasion Effects from Mass Communication.” Political Communication30 (4): 521–47.
47.
HoekstraValerie J.1995. “The Supreme Court and Opinion Change: An Experimental Study of the Court’s Ability to Change Opinion.” American Politics Research23 (1): 109–29.
48.
HoekstraValerie J.2000. “The Supreme Court and Local Public Opinion.” American Political Science Review94 (1): 89–100.
49.
HoekstraValerie J.2003. Public Reaction to Supreme Court Decision. New York: Cambridge University Press.
50.
HoekstraValerie J.SegalJeffrey A.1996. “The Shepherding of Local Public Opinion: The Supreme Court and Lamb’s Chapel.” Journal of Politics58 (4): 1079–102.
51.
Hollingsworth v. Perry. 2013. 133 S. Ct. 2652.
52.
HoogeMarcMeeusenCecil. 2013. “Is Same-Sex Marriage Legislation Related to Attitudes toward Homosexuality?”Sexuality Research and Social Policy10:258–68.
53.
HopkinsDaniel J.2010. “Politicized Places: Explaining Where and When Immigrants Provoke Local Opposition.” American Political Science Review104 (1): 40–60.
54.
ImaiKosukeRatkovicMarc. 2014. “Covariate Balancing Propensity Score.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society76 (1): 243–63.
55.
JohnsonTimothy R.Martin.Andrew D.1998. “The Public’s Conditional Response to Supreme Court Decisions.” American Political Science Review92 (2): 299–309.
56.
KeckThomas M.2009. “Beyond Backlash: Assessing the Impact of Judicial Decisions on LGBT Rights.” Law & Society Review43 (1): 151–85.
57.
KimYoung MieWangMingGotliebMelissa R.GabayItalyEdgerlyStephanie. 2013. “Ambivalence Reduction and Polarization in the Campaign Information Environment: The Interaction between Individual- and Contextual-Level Influences.” Communication Research40 (3): 388–416.
58.
KlarmanMichael J.2013. From the Closet to the Altar: Courts, Backlash, and the Struggle for Same-Sex Marriage. New York: Oxford University Press.
59.
KreitzerRebecca J.HamiltonAllison J.TolbertCaroline J.2014. “Does Policy Adoption Change Opinions on Minority Rights? The Effects of Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage.” Political Research Quarterly67 (4): 795–808.
60.
KreuterFraukePresserStanleyTourangeauRoger. 2013. “Social Desirability Bias in CATI, IVR, and Web Surveys.” Public Opinion Quarterly72 (5): 847–65.
61.
LanzaStephanie T.CoffmanDonna L.XuShu. 2013. “Causal Inference in Latent Class Analysis.” Structural Equation Modeling20 (3): 361–83.
62.
LaxJeffrey R.PhillipsJustin H.2009. “Gay Rights in the States: Public Opinion and Policy Responsiveness.” American Political Science Review103 (3): 367–86.
63.
LevenduskyMatthew. 2009. The Partisan Sort: How Liberals Became Democrats and Conservatives Became Republicans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
64.
LevenduskyMatthew. 2010. “Clearer Cues, More Consistent Voters: A Benefit of Elite Polarization.” Political Behavior32 (1): 111–31.
65.
LinzerDrew A.2011. “Reliable Inference in Highly Stratified Contingency Tables: Using Latent Class Models as Density Estimators.” Political Analysis19 (2): 173–87.
66.
LinzerDrew A.Lewis.Jeffrey B.2011. “poLCA: An R Package for Polytomous Variable Latent Class Analysis.” Journal of Statistical Software42 (10): 1–29.
67.
MarshallThomas R.1987. “The Supreme Court as an Opinion Leader: Court Decisions and the Mass Public.” American Politics Research15 (1): 147–68.
68.
MasonLilliana. 2015. “‘I Disrespectfully Agree’: The Differential Effects of Partisan Sorting on Social and Issue Polarization.” American Journal of Political Science59 (1): 128–45.
69.
MayhewDavid R. (1974) 2004. Congress: The Electoral Connection. 2nd ed.New Haven: Yale University Press.
70.
McCutheonAllan L.1985. “A Latent Class Analysis of Tolerance for Nonconformity in the American Public.” Public Opinion Quarterly49 (5): 474–88.
71.
MorganStephen L.WinshipChristopher. 2007. Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
72.
MucciaroniGary. 2008. Same Sex, Different Politics: Success and Failure in Struggles over Gay Rights. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
73.
MulliganKenneth. 2013. “Variability or Moderation? The Effects of Ambivalence on Political Opinions.” Political Behavior35 (3): 539–65.
PageBenjamin I.Shapiro.Robert Y.1983. “Effects of Public Opinion on Policy.” American Political Science Review77 (1): 175–90.
77.
PanagopoulosCostas. 2012. “Campaign Context and Preference Dynamics in the U.S. Presidential Elections.” Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties22 (2): 123–37.
78.
PearlJudea. (2000) 2009. Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. 2nd ed.New York: Cambridge University Press.
79.
PettyRichard E.CacioppoJohn T.1986. “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion.” In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, edited by BerkowitzLeonard, Vol. 19, 123–205. San Diego: Academic Press.
80.
PolikoffNancy D.1993. “We Will Get What We Ask for: Why Legalizing Gay and Lesbian Marriage Will Not ‘Dismantle the Legal Structure of Gender in Every Marriage.’” Virginia Law Review79 (7): 1535–50.
81.
PollockPhilip H.III., 1994. “Issues, Values, and Critical Moments: Did ‘Magic’ Johnson Transform Public Opinion on AIDS?” American Journal of Political Science38(2): 426-46.
82.
PostRobertSiegel.Reva B.2007. “Roe Rage: Democratic Constitutionalism and Backlash.” Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review42:373–433.
83.
PowellRichard J.2013. “Social Desirability Bias in Polling on Same-Sex Marriage Ballot Measures.” American Politics Research41:1052–70.
84.
PriceRichard S.Keck.Thomas M.2015. “Movement Litigation and Unilateral Disarmament: Abortion and the Right to Die.” Law & Social Inquiry40:880–907. doi:10.1111/lsi.12106
85.
RosenbergGerald N. (1991) 2008. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring about Social Change?2nd ed.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
86.
ScharkowMichaelVogelgesangJens. 2011. “Measuring the Public Agenda using Search Engine Queries.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research23 (1): 104–13.
87.
ScheingoldStuart. 1974. The Politics of Rights: Lawyers, Public Policy, and Political Change. New Haven: Yale University Press.
88.
SossJoeSchramSanford F.2007. “A Public Transformed? Welfare Reform as Policy Feedback.” American Political Science Review101 (1): 111–27.
89.
Sotres-AlvarezDanielaHerringAmy H.Siega-RizAnna-Maria. 2013. “Latent Transition Models to Study Women’s Changing Dietary Patterns from Pregnancy to 1 Year Postpartum.” American Journal of Epidemiology177:852–61. doi:10.1093/aje/kws303
90.
StimsonJames A.2004. Tides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American Politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
91.
StimsonJames A.MackuenMichael B.Erikson.Robert S.1995. “Dynamic Representation.” American Political Science Review89 (3): 543–65.
92.
StoddardThomas B.1997. “Why Gay People Should Seek the Right to Marry.” In We Are Everywhere: A Historical Sourcebook of Gay and Lesbian Politics, edited by BlasiusMarkPhelanShane, 753–56. New York: Routledge.
93.
StoneAmy L.2012. Gay Rights at the Ballot Box. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
94.
StoutenboroughJames W.Haider-MarkelDonald P.Allen.Mahalley D.2006. “Reassessing the Impact of Supreme Court Decisions on Public Opinion: Gay Civil Rights Cases.” Political Research Quarterly59 (3): 419–33.
95.
United States v. Windsor. 570 U.S. 12.
96.
WangJichuanWangXioqian. 2012. Structural Equation Modeling: Applications using Mplus. West Sussex: Wiley.
97.
WlezienChristopher. 1995. “The Public as Thermostat: Dynamic Preferences for Spending.” American Journal of Political Science39 (4): 981–1000.
98.
WolfsonEvan. 2004. Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality, and Gay People’s Right to Marry. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
