Youth Trust Peers, Local Government, and Institutions They See Taking Action

Young people’s lack of trust in institutions is one of the major challenges to maintaining or strengthening their connection to democracy. It can also be an opportunity: as threats to democratic institutions and values build in the U.S. and around the world, it is vital to outline strategies that can reignite young people’s connections to institutions and understanding of their civic power ahead of the 2026 elections and beyond. CIRCLE’s new data on youth trust in institutions paints a complicated picture of youth distrust, how it relates to civic action, and what we can learn from it to inform future efforts.

CIRCLE’s recent report, How Does Gen Z Really Feel About Democracy?, published in partnership with the nonpartisan nonprofit Protect Democracy, highlighted the precarious relationship between trust in institutions and young people’s civic development. One major finding: the most civically engaged young people, who we say show a Hostile Dissatisfaction toward democracy, tend to be less trusting of institutions. This aligns with past CIRCLE research, that highlights a connection between young people who are paying attention to and engaging with institutions and a certain degree of cynicism and disillusionment. Our research also found that only 16% of 18- to 29-year-olds believe democracy is working well for young people.

On the other side of the spectrum, our report finds that youth who display Dismissive Detachment toward democracy may feel burned by many civic and political institutions, driving their distrust. In between is the largest group of young people, those with a Passive Appreciation of democracy, whose shrug-their-shoulders attitude toward civic life includes relatively higher trust in institutions. However, while these youth participate in elections at the same rate as their peers, that is often the extent of their political engagement, so they may not encounter the same sources of frustration and disillusionment as their more activist peers. 

These three profiles of democratic attitudes highlight one of the core questions driving youth trust: Are civic and political institutions listening to and serving the needs of young people? 

Youth Trust their Peers and Nonprofits, Distrust Social Media and the GOP

The institutions trusted most by young people are their peers and neighbors (74% have “some” or “a great deal” of trust), nonprofit organizations (65%), the military (61%), local government (60%), police (57%), and state government (52%). All other institutions we asked about are trusted by less than half of youth. 

Young people’s least trusted institutions are social media companies (19% trusted), the Republican Party (33%), and Congress as an institution (37%)—as opposed to young people’s own members of Congress, whom 42% of youth trust.

It is notable that many of the groups or institutions young people trust most are those they are more likely to see up close and potentially have personal experience with. In addition to peers and neighbors, trusted nonprofits may include groups that youth see taking action and having an impact in their communities. Local and state governments may also feel much closer and tangible to youth than the federal government, as can the police they see in their neighborhoods.

On the other hand, institutions like social media companies, Congress, and major political parties may feel like remote and opaque organizations to youth. The higher trust for young people’s own members of Congress, as opposed to the institution itself, also suggests that the closer youth feel to a civic leader or institution, the more they may trust it. Other research has also highlighted that young people tend to trust institutions more when they perceive them as caring about issues that matter to them.

Most Youth Trust At Least a Handful of Institutions

While young people’s trust for many individual civic and political institutions may be relatively low, it is not the case that youth are inherently distrustful. Sixty-eight percent of young people trust at least five of the institutions we asked about, which is an encouraging indicator that there are avenues and opportunities to get more young people involved in civic life. Our CIRCLE Growing Voters framework highlights the importance of having multiple pathways to engagement for youth with diverse perspectives and experiences with democracy; for instance, not every young person will trust their local government, but for those who do, it can be a valuable way to deepen or expand their civic engagement.

On the other hand, the 8% of young people who trust no institutions are cause for concern, and the stark differences by race (17% of Black youth trust no institutions, compared to just 5% of white youth) paints a dire picture of inequities in trust that can turn into inequities in participation. There are also major differences by other demographic factors like education (38% of youth without college experience trust 0-4 institutions, compared to 28% of those with college experience) and gender (37% of young women vs. 26% young men). 

Black and Latino Youth Less Trusting of Institutions and Less Likely to Vote

With the exception of social media companies and the Republican Party, young people who voted were significantly more trusting of institutions than those who did not vote. Interestingly, the difference was largest for peers and neighbors (+22 trust among young people who voted), local government (+22), and nonprofit organizations (+19).

Differences in trust by race and education suggest some underlying dynamics shaping this outcome. Averaging trust across the fourteen institutions we asked about, Black youth had the lowest trust (37%), followed by Hispanic/Latino youth (44%). These two groups also had the lowest turnout in the 2024 election, highlighting how lower levels of trust in certain racial/ethnic communities, which likely is driven in part by historical and current marginalization or mistreatment by some of these very institutions, may be serving as a barrier to electoral participation.

A similar trend emerges when it comes to education: young people without college experience were less trusting than those with college experience. The difference was largest in young people’s trust of their peers and neighbors, nonprofit organizations, and state and local government. As with race/ethnicity, this mirrors the data on youth voter turnout, as youth with college experience are much more likely to vote. 

These findings raise a red flag for some common best practices of youth voter engagement. Peer-to-peer relational organizing is often considered one of the most effective approaches for motivating young people to vote and participate in other forms of civic action, but some of those who are already least likely to vote are also least likely to trust their peers. 

Additionally, community organizations often play a vital role in filling gaps in access and outreach, especially for young people who have lacked other forms of civic support from institutions like higher education. In fact, our research has previously shown that community organizations can be more effective in reaching Black youth and providing information about issues and elections, seemingly contradicting the lower trust Black youth have of nonprofits. However, both can be true – and the gaps in trust highlight the need to ensure that all youth, including youth of color and those who don’t have college experience, have trust in these organizations and are primed for engagement when contact is made.

Lastly, particularly in a moment of intense political polarization and upheaval in the federal government, the distrust of local government among nonvoters and low-turnout groups is important to understand when crafting pathways to youth engagement. The accessibility and visibility of local government may be driving trust and even engagement among some young people; rebuilding trust locally among low-propensity young voters could be a first step towards fostering engagement at all levels of democracy. 

White Youth Driving Distrust of Social Media

Our new data on institutional trust reveals other major racial and gender dynamics.

Young people’s distrust of social media companies is noteworthy, especially since 77% of young people report getting election information from at least one social media site, and many of these companies’ leaders are becoming increasingly influential figures in American politics. This distrust is primarily driven by white youth who, despite being more trusting of institutions overall, were the least trusting of social media companies (14%), while Black youth were the most trusting (26%). A recent CIRCLE analysis highlighted differences in youth media usage, including by race, finding that young people of color were more likely to use social media as a top source for political information, which may be reflective of, or contribute to, their higher level of trust.

Averaging across all institutions, young men were more trusting of institutions than young women. The Democratic Party and social media / technology companies are the only institutions that young women trusted more than young men. Young men’s disconnection from American political life has been a major conversation topic since the 2024 election, and this data complicates common perceptions of distrusting and disconnected young men.

This may be a symptom of a broader engagement gap between young men and young women, following our findings that young people who are more engaged tend to be more distrusting. Ensuring that young women don’t become so distrustful that they disengage with democracy is vital, especially as two of the three biggest drops in youth turnout between 2020 and 2024 by race and gender were among young Latinas (19 points) and young Black women (7 points). Young men’s relatively higher trust may also be an indication of how institutions may be wielded as tools to support deepening young men’s participation in civic life. 

What Makes Youth Trust Institutions?

To better understand what drives young people’s trust, we asked 18-34 year olds who said they trusted or strongly trusted the office of the President and Congress which factors contributed to their trust. For both Congress and the office of the President, young people who trust these offices tend to do so because “They are working to improve the conditions of all citizens.” This tracks with much of our other data on what motivates youth to vote and take political action: the desire for action on the issues they care about.

Other reasons for trusting institutions, such as honesty, lack of corruption, accessibility, and high-quality services, were rarely cited by youth as reasons to trust institutions. For example, less than 20% of young people who trust Congress said they do so because Congress is honest or not corrupt. Young people are also unlikely to say that “it is easy for someone like me to contact them.”

These insights from youth point to a path for improving trust in civic and political institutions. Lean into what is already working for youth who show trust: help more young people see that the government is working to improve the conditions of all citizens. When youth see the role and impact of the government on issues they care about, and on the lives of their peers and community members, they connect the dots on how institutions can be a force for good that deserve their trust. When political realities make it difficult to show youth that government and its institutions do lead to positive impact, it’s important to commit to changes and reforms—ideally with input from youth themselves—that can make institutions more effective and responsive.

This finding aligns with other major CIRCLE research on young people’s feelings about democracy more broadly. In our recent report on Gen Z’s democratic attitudes, we found that though a majority of young people believe in the core principles and values of democracy, they don’t see American democracy today living up to those ideals, especially in a way that works well for young people. 

We also found that trust – or lack thereof – in institutions and political processes was often cited by young people as one of the reasons for their views of democracy. Among those who don’t believe that democracy is working well for youth, many pointed to a lack of representation of young people in political institutions, a lack of trust in the electoral system, or discontent with political parties and government policies.

Their Take: Youth Tackle Institutional Trust in their Own Words

As part of our ongoing exploration of youth trust in institutions, we asked four young leaders to write short essays and/or analyses based on our data and their own experiences. Their perspectives, part of a series called “Our Take,” tackle both problems that can contribute to institutional distrust, and potential efforts to mitigate it. For example, one young activist writes about how the potential impact of registration and voting restrictions on his community can hinder trust in democracy. Another young leader makes the case for capitalizing on young people’s high trust in local government and community organizations to deepen youth engagement.

Read young people’s takes below!