Replication Data for: Bureaucratic Responsiveness to LGBT Americans

Marriage rights were extended to same-sex couples in the United States in 2015. However, anecdotes of bureaucratic noncompliance (in the form of bias or denial of license issuance) raise the possibility that de jure marriage equality has not led to equality in practice. We investigate this by conducting a nationwide audit experiment of local-level marriage license-granting officials in the United States. These officials vary in the constituencies they serve, as well as how they are selected, allowing us to evaluate long-standing hypotheses about bureaucratic responsiveness. Overall, we find no evidence of systematic discrimination against same-sex couples—regardless of responsiveness measure, institutions, ideology, or prior state legal history. We find, however, that among same-sex couples, officials tended to be more responsive to lesbian couples. In contrast to evidence in other areas of service provision, such as policing and federal assistance programs, we find bureaucrats tasked with provision of marriage services show little evidence of discrimination.

2015年，美国将婚姻权拓展至同性伴侣群体。然而，有关官僚机构存在违规不作为（具体表现为偏见对待或拒绝颁发结婚证）的传闻，引发了法律层面的婚姻平等并未在实践中真正落实的可能性。本研究通过对美国地方婚姻登记官员开展全国性审计实验，对此展开探究。这些官员所服务的选区范围、选拔任用机制均存在差异，这使得我们能够检验关于官僚回应性的一系列长期存续的学术假说。总体而言，我们未发现任何针对同性伴侣的系统性歧视证据——无论从回应性衡量标准、制度环境、意识形态还是所在州此前的婚姻法律沿革来看，均是如此。不过，研究发现，在同性伴侣群体中，官员对女同性伴侣的回应性普遍更高。与警务、联邦援助项目等其他公共服务领域的已有研究证据不同，负责婚姻登记服务的官僚机构几乎未表现出歧视倾向。