Youth Are Taking Civic Action, But Need Opportunities and Support to Overcome Socioeconomic Barriers

The past decade has been an era of high youth civic engagement. The 2018 and 2020 election cycles featured historic highs in youth voter turnout. Electoral participation decreased slightly in 2022 and 2024, but remained among the highest on record for young people ages 18-29.

Youth have also been civically active outside the voting booth: participating in protests and leading social movements. From the gun violence prevention protests after the Parkland shooting in 2018, to the racial justice movement following George Floyd’s murder in 2020, to more recent activism related to the Israel-Palestine conflict, youth have often been at the forefront of action on some of the most critical issues facing the country.

In this new analysis, we examine whether young people have remained engaged in various forms of civic action, the issues that motivate their participation, and some of the barriers that may be standing in the way of increased engagement. Using data from CIRCLE’s Post-2024 Election Youth Poll, we identify key trends that can inform youth engagement strategies and institutional support for broader participation.

Youth Are Taking Local and Political Action

By and large, millions of young people remain engaged in civic and political activities. Approximately 1 in 4 youth (24%) consider themselves part of a movement that votes to express its views. About one in five have participated in protests (18%) or engaged in issue advocacy (20%); more than a third have boycotted products (41%) or tried to convince other youth to vote (34%); and more than half have signed petitions (56%). For all of these actions, many more youth say they’d be willing to do it if presented with the opportunity, which highlights the continued need for outreach that connects young people to accessible avenues for civic participation.

By far, the most common ways young people are contributing to civic life are by talking about politics (66% have done it) and by helping their peers and neighbors who are in need (75%.) This tracks with our findings on young people’s trust in civic institutions, which illustrate that youth tend to trust their personal networks and local communities far more than national political institutions and organizations. That trust may prompt conversation and action, and could be a powerful lever for reaching youth by starting where, and with whom, they’re already engaged.

In many cases, young people are taking action at similar or higher rates than they did in previous years. According to our data, youth are protesting, singing petitions, and donating money to campaigns more than they did in the previous election cycle—though we acknowledge that presidential elections can drive more civic and political action than midterm years.

There are some noteworthy demographic differences in whether youth feel like they’re part of a movement and whether they’re taking civic action. Black and White youth are most likely to say they’re part of a movement that votes to express its political views—28% and 24%, respectively, agree with that statement. Notably, young Black men are the most likely to agree (33%) even though they had the lowest youth voter turnout in 2024. This may suggest that Black youth want to use their voices at the ballot box but are facing structural barriers to electoral participation.

Similarly, though young women have voted at higher rates than young men in recent election cycles, young men and women are equally likely to say they feel like they’re part of a political movement. However, consistent with our previous research on the civic leadership of young women, we find that they are more likely than young men to engage in actions like protesting (21% vs 14%) and signing petitions (60% vs 51%).

Youth Are Most Concerned about Economic Issues, but Driven to Action by Social Issues

Young people are issue-first voters: they are motivated to vote, and decide who to vote for, based on their issue priorities and their hope for concrete improvements to their communities. The same appears to be true for civic participation beyond the ballot box: there is a connection between the issues youth care about and whether they feel like they’re part of a movement. At the same time, there appears to be a mismatch between young people’s top issue priorities and those that drive their engagement.

Issues like gun policy, free speech, LGBTQ+ issues, racism, and immigration have the strongest associations with youth movements: young people who chose each of those issues as a top-3 priority in the 2024 election were more likely to report that they belong to a political movement. At the other end of the spectrum, young people who prioritize more economic issues like jobs, cost of living, healthcare, and childcare are less likely to report movement belonging and participation. 

This suggests that young people may not be finding accessible and welcoming movements on issues they care about connected to economic concerns—and perhaps that existing movements on those issues are not reaching out to and making room for youth. At the same time, issues like gun violence and racial justice remain key motivators for youth movement-building and fruitful avenues for engaging them in civic action.

Our data on the types of civic actions young people take also back up this trend. Young people who chose LGBTQ+ issues, democracy, or climate change as top-3 priorities were much more likely to protest (37%, 36%, and 33%, respectively, say they’ve done it) than youth who prioritized cost of living (28%) or jobs (21%). Similarly, youth concerned with voting rights or foreign policy were more likely to engage in policy advocacy (both 38%) than youth who care most about the cost of living (33%) and jobs (29%).

The data does also suggest that at least some young people concerned about economic issues are potentially willing to take civic action even if they have not done so already. For example, 33% of youth who prioritized the cost of living in 2024 said they would engage in policy advocacy and 28% said they would attend protests. There appear to be opportunities for groups and movements who take action on these issues to engage interested youth.

It’s also notable that young Republicans are slightly more likely than young Democrats to say they’re part of a movement. The same is true ideologically: young conservatives are just as likely as young progressives—or more—to say they belong to a movement. At the same time, for most types of civic action, young Democrats are more likely to have participated than young Republicans.

Structural Inequities and Socioeconomic Struggles Hinder Civic Action

Our data suggests other connections between voting and broader forms of political action. It’s not the case that some young people are choosing to effect change by voting and others by protesting or boycotting. Most young people are doing both or neither.

Twenty-seven percent of young people who say they voted in the 2024 election also say they’re part of a movement, compared to 13% of those who didn’t vote. Across every civic action in our survey, youth who voted in 2024 are much more active than those who didn’t: protesting (22% vs. 8%), issue advocacy (24% vs. 6%), serving in local leadership (17% vs. 5%), and volunteering (48% vs. 24%). The pattern even extends to less “formal” types of civic engagement, like talking politics with friends (73% vs. 43%) and helping others (77% vs. 68%).

These findings support other recent CIRCLE research, including our landmark report on youth attitudes about democracy, that shows there is a group of youth that is broadly disengaged from all forms of civic participation. These young people usually have lower educational attainment: in our survey, youth without college experience were less likely to take nearly every type of civic action—and less than half as likely to say they have protested, volunteered, taken leadership positions, and attended public meetings.

Young people’s financial situation also appears to have a major impact on whether they take civic action. Across a wide range of forms of civic participation, young people who sometimes or often struggle to meet their basic needs are less active than youth who are financially comfortable. For example, 19% of youth who sometimes or often struggle financially say they have participated in a local group, compared to about 30% of youth who are financially stable or wealthy. Thirty-three percent of struggling youth have volunteered for a local organization, compared to half of young people in a stronger financial situation.

Civic participation can require time and resources that youth who are struggling economically may not have. Belonging to local groups often involves doing unpaid work; participating in boycotts can involve paying a higher price for products or services. Engaging youth across the socioeconomic spectrum in civic action may require accounting for these dynamics and providing meaningful support so that all youth can participate.

One notable exception to this trend is running for office. Though the numbers are small, young people who often struggle financially are just as likely as all but the wealthiest youth to say they’ve pursued elected office. It may be that financial struggles can also be a motivator for some types of political engagement. However, young people with significant financial resources are still twice as likely to run for office as youth who are struggling financially, underscoring a trend in our previous research on barriers to youth becoming political candidates.

CIRCLE research continues to uncover and underscore the centrality of economic issues and struggles to young people’s civic participation. Major gaps in youth voter turnout by educational attainment and financial situation prevent us from having a representative electorate. Young people prioritize economic concerns like cost of living, but are not connecting with social and political movements to take action on those issues. And youth who are having trouble making ends meet have less capacity for civic participation, and therefore remain disengaged from the problems they want to solve.

These inequities are urgent calls to action for any community and institution that wants to increase voter turnout, improve youth civic engagement, and strengthen democracy.