Down With DOMA: America's Evolution on Marriage Equality Policy

In 1996, when 65% of Americans opposed same-sex marriage and only 27% supported it, President Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) into law. DOMA federally defined marriage as between one man and one woman,... [ view full abstract ]

In 1996, when 65% of Americans opposed same-sex marriage and only 27% supported it, President Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) into law. DOMA federally defined marriage as between one man and one woman, and states were permitted to deny recognition to a marriage granted by another state not meeting this definition. Less than two decades later, public attitudes towards same-sex marriage had nearly reversed, with public support rising to 57% and opposition declining to 39%. Along with this shift in public opinion came the Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling that DOMA was unconstitutional and its subsequent ruling in 2015 that the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to same-sex marriage. U.S. marriage equality policy’s complete – and rapid – reversal gives rise to two key questions: Why did this change in marriage equality policy occur? Concurrently, how did it happen so fast? I will rely on the theoretical framework of punctuated equilibrium to demonstrate that it was primarily the deliberate efforts of policy entrepreneurs to a) redefine the policy image of the issue, and b) engage in venue shopping to find the institutional venues most receptive to their policy aims that drove the shift on marriage equality policy.