If you’re looking for our January 2025 poll, see Poll: As Trump Is Inaugurated, Californians Seek Independence.

Highlights

• 50% of Californians say they trust Sacramento more than Washington—only 23% say the reverse
• 71% say California would be better off with special autonomous status within the U.S.
• 44% of Californians would vote for a ballot measure for peaceful, legal secession—but 54% would vote against
• 72% of Californians want California police to arrest federal immigration officers that exceed their authority or act maliciously
• 80% of Californians want to control borders with other states “like a country”

Californians endorsed more than a dozen changes to state policy that would make California more autonomous.

Background

This poll was run by YouGov June 11-23, 2025. It is the third in a series of such polls commissioned by the Independent California Institute.

Like any poll run by a reputable polling agency, results are accurate but their precision is subject to sampling error. This poll’s margin of error is ±5.7%, and differences between polls have a slightly higher margin of error. For details, see Methodology, below.

If you’re curious about the exact phrasing of any poll questions, you can read the full text of the poll here.

Californian Identity

We asked Californians a few questions about how they view themselves, California, and the federal government.

Trust in Government

Californians’ trust in the federal government has collapsed after five months under the Trump administration. Currently, about half of Californians say they trust California’s government in Sacramento more than they trust Washington, D.C., with less than a quarter saying the opposite.

More Californian than American

Between February 2024 and January 2025, Californians’ sense of their identity shifted. Since January 2025, Californians overall have felt more Californian than American, though the majority feel equally Californian and American.

This shift may now be permanent. However, Californians’ identity hasn’t shifted further since Trump was inaugurated.

Still a “nation-state”

Californians’ belief that California is “in some ways its own nation” is very stable over time:

Three Independence Scenarios

In all three polls we’ve run, we asked Californians to imagine whether Californians would be better off than they are now if each of the following happened at some point over the next ten years:

• Secession: California peacefully becomes an independent country and maintains friendly relations with the U.S.
• Autonomy: California negotiates a special autonomous status within the United States
• Land + Water: California negotiates the transfer to state and local government of nearly all federal land and water infrastructure within California

Californians consistently hold a favorable view of all three scenarios, with the highest favorability (roughly two-thirds) toward Autonomy.

Their views are also remarkably stable over time; all the “shifts” in the graph below are within the polls’ margins of error and can be explained entirely by sampling error.

In a February Berkeley Intergovernmental Studies poll, Californians overwhelmingly expressed feared the Trump administration’s impact on California. That showed up in our poll as a collapse of confidence in the federal government (relative to California’s state government), but it didn’t have a statistically significant impact on Californians’ overall sense of independence scenarios. Why not?

One possibility is that respondents are taking the “some point over the next ten years” aspect of the questions seriously. Ten years from now, Trump will almost certainly not be president of the U.S., and may have died of old age.

In any case, Californians know they’d be better off with more independence from the federal government. The big question is what they want to do with that knowledge.

Secession

56% of Californians said they thought Californians would be better off if California peacefully seceded.

Although Californians’ overall favorability towards peaceful secession hasn’t changed over the course of our polling, the percentage of Californians who said peaceful secession would make Californians “Much Better Off” increased significantly between January and June 2025:

We asked how Californians might be better or worse off if California were independent with respect to a list of issues. Unfortunately, those results are delayed due to a programming error in the poll. We’ll post them here once they’re available.

Does 56% of Californians’ belief that peaceful secession would be good for Californians translate into majority support for secession? For the first time, we asked Californians if they would vote for a statewide ballot measure that would ”declare California’s intention to peacefully and legally withdraw from the United States, through negotiation with the federal government.“

44% of Californians indicated they would or were leaning that way:

This is a record high result.

(The graph says 45% because we eliminate “Not sure” results to make an apples-to-apples comparison between polls.)

Does this mean the Calexit initiative or something like it would have a chance of passage? Maybe, but it would be a steep uphill climb: campaigners would have to convince Californians who are leaning towards a No vote to vote Yes, while not losing any existing supporters. (Also, the Calexit initiative as currently framed sets a higher threshold of 55% for an independence vote to count, which is almost certainly out of reach.)

44% also matches our rough model, supported by all the (sparsely) available facts, that support for independence lags the sense that independence would make people better off by about 10% (see Why other secession pollsters should give peace a chance). In this case, support lags favorability (56%) by 12%. If the model is correct, about 65% of Californians would need to feel they’d be better off if California peacefully seceded before a vote for secession would have clear majority support.

One persistent barrier to Californians seeking peaceful, legal secession from the U.S. is that the majority of Californians don’t think it’s possible, even with the authorization of Congress:

As a counterpoint, we make a strong case that authorization of Congress is enough in Texas v. What? 5 Big Myths about Peaceful Secession from the U.S. Public discourse about the legality of secession has also shifted since the first Trump administration: rather than arguing secession would require a constitutional amendment, nay-sayers now make arguments to the effect of “California or any other state’s exit would have to be approved by both houses of Congress” and then argue that of course Congress wouldn’t approve.

Another barrier is that Californians are pessimistic overall about California’s chances of becoming independent (though about 30% of Californians say it will “definitely” or “probably” happen.)

However, Californians demonstrated very broad support in this poll for policies that, while within California’s power, look a lot like being an independent country. These include:

• 80%: control California’s borders with other states “like a country”
• 74%: create a path to state citizenship for non-U.S. citizen Californians
• 72%: arrest federal immigration officers that exceed their authority or act maliciously

See below for more details.

Autonomy

Californians really, really like the idea of California negotiating special autonomous status within the U.S. In this poll, a record high of 71% of respondents said Californians would be better off with special autonomous status, “giving Californians more control over decisions currently made by the federal government, including more control over federal tax dollars paid by Californians.”

Unlike with secession, a clear majority of Californians already want to take action to gain more autonomy from the federal government. About two-thirds of Californians endorse the idea of a permanent state commission dedicated to that goal:

While overall support for the commission stayed about the same between January and June, the percentage of Californians who said California should “definitely” form the commission increased significantly.

Ultimately, if Californians want the ability to make decisions at the state level that are currently made by the federal government, they’re going to need Congress to pass a laws to that effect. Unfortunately, Californians are systematically underrepresented in the U.S. Senate and the presidential selection process. Their primary negotiation leverage comes from their representation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

About three-fifths of Californians believe that California’s members of Congress are justified in using “hardball tactics” in the House of Representatives, such as refusing to pass a budget, to gain greater autonomy for California:

Californians also appear willing to have the state government do more in areas that are within the state’s authority but are traditionally handled by the federal government.

For example, 71% of Californians said the state government should create a new law enforcement division focused on violent extremism and hate crimes, “so that Californians are less dependent on the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to ensure their safety.” See below for more details.

Land + Water

As a state in the western U.S., California lacks full jurisdiction over nearly half of its own territory, because that land is owned and controlled by the federal government.

Think of it as a form of special un-autonomous status.

Similarly (and unlike in most states), the federal government controls a significant portion of dams, canals, and other water infrastructure in California, deciding how about half the water Californians use is allocated. Federal control was especially hard to miss this January, when Trump ordered the Army Corps of Engineers to waste 2.2 gallons of California water in a publicity stunt (see Fire and Flood: Federal Interference Wastes California’s Water Resources).

In all three of our polls, just under two-thirds of Californians have consistently said that Californians would be better off if control of “nearly all” federal land and water infrastructure in California were transferred to state and local governments.

The percentage of Californians saying this change would make Californians “much better off” increased significantly between February 2024 and this June.

63% of Californians said that federal land should be transferred from the federal control to state and local government.

The percentage of Californians who responded “definitely” increased significantly between January and June.

These results in no way indicate that Californians want to see federal land sold off, as was recently proposed in the U.S. Senate. Arguably, that land is more likely to remain in public hands if it’s owned by California and not the federal government.

Similarly, 63% of Californians support the transfer of nearly all federal water infrastructure in California to state and local water agencies:

Immigration

This poll had devoted an entire section, with several new questions, to how California should respond to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement actions in California.

#ArrestICE for real?

72% of Californians responded “definitely” or “probably” to the question “Should police in California arrest federal immigration officers who act maliciously or knowingly exceed their authority under federal law and charge them with assault, false imprisonment, kidnapping, human trafficking, or other crimes?”

The question was carefully worded to match the actual bounds of federal supremacy as defined by case law. For example, Clifton v. Cox 549 F. 2d 722, 724, an appellate case about a federal drug enforcement officer who shot an unarmed man in Garberville, CA, reads:

In so holding, we do not mean to imply that the exercise of authority in and of itself places a federal officer beyond the reach of a state’s criminal process. The significant question of whether the conduct was necessary and proper under the circumstances must still be answered. Essential to this determination, assuming the truth of the state’s evidence, is whether the official employs means which he cannot honestly consider reasonable in discharging his duties or otherwise acts out of malice or with some criminal intent.

One recent example of possible criminal activity by federal agents happened shortly after the poll completed, where ICE and other Homeland Security Agents blasted off the front door of a Huntington Park, CA house where they knew only U.S. citizens were resident, in apparent retaliation for one of the residents running into an Border Patrol vehicle during a traffic accident.

Open up immigration-collaborating officials to lawsuits?

State law limits, but does not entirely forbid, collaboration between California government and federal immigration. A supermajority of Californians (72%) want to make it easier to sue California officials who “help federal immigration authorities violate the due process rights of immigrants, in violation of state law,” holding them “civilly accountable.”

The question noted that some county sheriffs had openly stated their intent to do so, though it did not name Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco or Amador County Sheriff Gary Redman by name.

One way California officials appear to be currently collaborating with immigration enforcement in violation of California law is by sharing license plate data.

Make it easier to remove sheriffs?

76% of Californians want their county boards of supervisors to be able to remove sheriffs who “violate state law or the policies of the county they serve.”

This would be a historic change in California policy. County sheriffs in California are elected officials too, and in all but a handful of counties, the only way to remove them from office between elections is to hold a recall election.

San Mateo County made history just after the poll ran when its board of supervisors voted unanimously to remove their county sheriff from office, making use of a county charter amendment that passed in March 2025.

Total non-cooperation with ICE

A clear majority (57%) of Californians want to completely forbid California officials from collaborating with immigration enforcement and penalize government employees who violate the policy:

Risk a government shutdown to stop mass deportations?

58% of Californians want California’s U.S. Representatives to vote against any federal budget that enables mass deportations, “even if that leads to a temporary government shutdown.”

This largely matches results from our January poll, but the percentage of Californians responding “definitely” has increased significantly.

State citizenship for immigrants

Finally, 74% of Californians endorse creating a path to state citizenship for long-term California residents who don’t hold U.S. citizenship.

The question noted that the U.S. Constitution has always allowed states to grant state citizenship to state residents who are not U.S. citizens and requires all states to grant citizens of other states the same privileges and immunities that their own state citizens have.

Protecting Californians

Californians were supportive of two other proposals to make Californians safer.

Controlling state borders “like a country”

80% of Californians polled want California to use its Border Control Stations to control California’s borders with Arizona, Nevada, and Oregon “more like a country,” checking for illegal guns, drugs, and other contraband, with a significant increase in “definitely” responses since January.

Currently the Border Control Stations are used primarily to inspect plant material for agricultural pests.

CA Dept. of Hate Crimes and Violent Extremism

Already high support spiked to 71% for creating a new state law enforcement division focused on hate crimes and violent extremism, “so that Californians are less dependent on the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to ensure their safety.”

Money

Californians were broadly supportive of three policies that would put California’s government on stronger financial footing.

Clawing back millionaries’ Trump tax cuts

69% of Californians support raising income taxes on Californians earning over $1 million a year, to “recapture some of the Trump tax cuts” and compensate for the loss of federal funding to Medicaid and other federally-funded state run programs.

At the time of writing, the state legislature just approved a budget that does not attempt to recapture the Trump tax cuts, instead relying on borrowing and cuts to Medicaid and other public services.

Governor Gavin Newsom no longer publicly releases his tax returns, but based on the most recent data available, he would have to pay the millionaires’ tax if it were enacted.

Expanding the Rainy Day Fund

77% of Californians support doubling the maximum size of the state’s Rainy Day Fund, matching results from January:

There is a proposed constitutional amendment, ACA 1, that would do exactly that, though it appears to have been stalled in the state legislature since January.

Sovereign wealth fund

68% of respondents want California to create a sovereign wealth fund to provide universal basic income to Californians:

The poll question cited the Alaska Permanent Fund as a real-world example.

Other policies

We polled Californians on four other proposed policies that don’t fit into the categories above. Here they are, with the most popular policy first.

Preventing the next Prop 8

71% of Californians supported closing a loophole that allows ballot initiatives to write equal protection violations into California’s constitution.

The poll question mentioned Prop 8 (2008), the same-sex marriage ban, as an example.

State contracting rules and abortion access

63% of Californians supported changes to state government contracting rules to ensure that all U.S.-based employees of state contractors can access an abortion.

Bypassing the U.S. Supreme Court

Californians were evenly split on whether the California Supreme Court should “openly ridicule and bypass U.S. Supreme Court decisions they believe deliberately misinterpret the U.S. Constitution.”

Letting California governments take down the U.S. flag

Only 28% of Californians supported a proposal to change a state law that requires state and local government to fly the U.S. flag.

This may bode badly for the Calexit initiative, whose primary practical result, if independence were declared, is to take the U.S. flag down from government buildings in California.

This very negative result might be a result of Californians’ dual identity of Californian and American—only 30% of Californians said they felt “more Californian than American” (see above). Or it may show a hunger for pragmatic solutions over symbolism.

As a practical matter, flying the U.S. flag is already optional for California charter cities and special districts. See Do California cities have to fly the American flag?

Methodology

From YouGov:

Project Name: Independent Californian Poll #3
Interviews: 500
Field Period: June 11, 2025 – June 23, 2025

YouGov interviewed 554 respondents who were then matched down to a sample of 500 to produce the final dataset. The respondents were matched to a sampling frame on gender, age, race, and education. The sampling frame is a politically representative “modeled frame” of US adults, based upon the American Community Survey (ACS) public use microdata file, public voter file records, the 2020 Current Population Survey (CPS) Voting and Registration supplements, the 2020 National Election Pool (NEP) exit poll, and the 2020 CES surveys, including demographics and 2020 presidential vote.

The matched cases were weighted to the sampling frame using propensity scores. The matched cases and the frame were combined and a logistic regression was estimated for inclusion in the frame. The propensity score function included age, gender, race/ethnicity, years of education, and region. The propensity scores were grouped into deciles of the estimated propensity score in the
frame and post-stratified according to these deciles.

The weights were then post-stratified on a four-way stratification of gender, age (4-categories), race (4-categories), and education (4-categories), to produce the final weight. In addition, the weights were post-stratified on the marginal distributions of place of birth (3-categories), 2020 presidential vote choice, and 2024 presidential vote choice.

Sampling error

Because YouGov’s methodology relies on weighting, our poll’s margin of error is ±5.7% (with 95% confidence), slightly larger than it would be if it relied on an unweighted sample of the same size. This means that for any topline figure.

You can be (95%) confident that a topline figure is above 50% if it’s 54.8% or higher (since this is a one-tailed distribution).

Similarly, you can be confident that a figure really increased or decreased between polls (possibly by a very small amount) if the difference is larger than ±6.7%.