Leading up to the 2015 landmark Supreme Court decision, Obergefell v. Hodges, which made marriage equality a federal right, sociologist Mark Regnerus published controversial research titled the “New Family Structures Study”. Regnerus, who is forthcoming about the fact that his Catholic faith shapes his practice as a social scientist, published the study in 2012 in the journal Social Science Research.

The study purported that children raised by a parent in a same-gender relationship are at greater risk of negative psychosocial outcomes in adulthood compared to children raised by straight parents. The study was funded primarily by The Witherspoon Institute and The Bradley Foundation, both far-right interest groups that actively lobby against LGBTQ+ rights, and was viewed by many political commentators as a blatant effort by both groups to influence the Supreme Court’s decision in several high-profile cases, including Obergefell v. Hodges.

While the study eventually fell out of social commentary in the United States, today’s “Greater Than” movement, a coalition of prominent anti-LGBTQ+ lobbyists and political figures, has utilized it as one of its primary motivations to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges.

In 2025, the Witherspoon Institute, which funded Regnerus’s study, released an op-ed, conveniently in its own publication, claiming there is “new vindication” for the study because AI has supposedly allowed for a more accurate interpretation of his data. Meanwhile, the writer conveniently avoids the elephant in the room: The allegation that Regenerus manipulated his data to suit his own theological worldview.

Not seeing how marriage equality giving tax benefits to marriage, inheritance law, or preference is buying a home inherently links to child upbringing. How does the freedom of association link to raising children?