In the aftermath of the 2024 presidential election, there’s been a lot of talk about family members severing ties or setting new boundaries due to political differences. And it’s not just parents, siblings and extended family. There have been headlines about election-related divorce, too.
Although there is no hard data around the pursuit of divorces since the election of former President Donald Trump, many lawyers have shared anecdotal evidence of an effect.
Family law attorney Jo Anna C. Parker in Alabama tweeted on Nov. 9 that 14 potential new clients scheduled divorce consultations in the days following the election ― a significant increase compared with her typical workweek and even more notable because November is usually a slow month for new divorce cases, she said.
Another family law attorney, Tiffany Bond in Maine, told HuffPost she was similarly busy fielding intake calls in the week after Trump was reelected.
“I had to send calls to other attorneys because I couldn’t take any more myself,” she said. “It happened the last time Trump was elected, too.”
So why have some divorce lawyers experienced this increase in volume of potential cases after Election Day? We asked them to explain the reasons married people might be pursuing this option now.
Elections can push couples with preexisting issues over the edge.
“Now more than ever, the rhetoric of politics and support for certain candidates are prompting individuals to reassess their personal relationships,” said Kaylan Gaudio, a family law attorney at Sodoma Law in North Carolina. “Couples with differing political ideologies may find themselves reexamining their compatibility.”
She noted that some women in particular may view their partner’s support for President-elect Donald Trump as a personal affront and disregard for their rights and values.
“Some women feel that supporting a candidate who wants to eliminate their right to chose what to do with their own body, or the fact that the candidate has been found liable for sexual abuse by a jury coupled with his disrespectful and sexualized rhetoric toward women as unfathomable,” Gaudio said. “A spouse may question their partner’s values and the respect he or she has for women if the individual is willing to support a candidate with this track record.”
Following the 2016 and 2024 presidential elections, Bond heard from women who expressed feeling like their partner does not value them as an equal and a human being.
“A lot of these people have been unhappy for a long time,” she explained. “There are fundamental incompatibilities that have grown over time. It’s not simply ‘You voted for Trump, so I’m going to divorce you.’ There might be some gloating or celebrating that involves a husband saying offensive things to his wife, which adds to her underlying feeling that he doesn’t respect her. It’s more like the straw that broke the camel’s back, but that camel already had a lot of straw.”
A major event like an election might highlight how much a couple has grown apart over the years. They may have married young before they really knew themselves or each other. Now one or both partners may be demanding the other come into their worldview instead of reflecting on how they can better express their values and connect.
“Being inflexible is not the way to conquer incompatibilities,” Bond said.
She recalled a divorce case she worked on after the 2016 election in which a white husband who supported Trump could not understand why his Black wife was upset by his choice. And he refused to consider how race could be related.
“Another issue is that a lot of people view politics as a team sport,” Bond added. “When their team wins, they celebrate and think it’s all in good fun and take an almost hazing approach to the other side. But they don’t realize how politics have changed such that there’s an incentive to dehumanize and scare and how it impacts women to see their fundamental rights eroded. This is not just some sort of sports bet.”
Kara Chrobak, a family law attorney in Denver with the firm Buchalter, believes it is unsurprising in today’s divisive climate that politics can play a major role in the demise of a marriage. She pointed to issues like immigration and abortion, which can create big relationship rifts.
“This is especially true when the individuals are trying to parent children from a united front,” Chrobak noted. “Even if couples do not disagree on fundamental political issues, elections can still be very stressful for individuals. People might be anxious about future policy changes or concerned about their financial stability as a result of an election. This kind of stress can certainly cause issues in a relationship and may lead to a divorce.”
There’s also concern about changes to no-fault divorce.
“Our firm has noticed a recent uptick in clients contacting us to discuss divorce proceedings, specifically with concerns about possible changes in law regarding no-fault divorces,” Gaudio noted. “Awareness of no-fault divorce has grown significantly in recent years, alongside concerns about the potential for local governments to limit or eliminate its availability.”
No-fault divorce simply means that either spouse can file for divorce without needing to provide evidence that the other spouse was at fault for the separation. California became the first state to legalize no-fault divorce in 1969, and over the next four decades, every other state followed suit, finishing with New York in 2010.
“In a fault divorce, one spouse claims that the other is responsible for the breakdown of the marriage due to specific wrongful conduct,” Gaudio explained. “Unlike no-fault divorces, a fault divorce requires proving that one spouse’s actions caused the separation. Therefore, if no-fault divorce laws were overturned, proving a fault ground ― such as adultery, cruelty or abandonment ― would become necessary to obtain a divorce.”
A growing list of conservative politicians, including Vice President-elect JD Vance, have spoken out against no-fault divorce in recent years, and some have even introduced legislation that would roll back these laws. Many of the advisers on the Project 2025 right-wing policy initiative have also proposed restricting or eliminating no-fault divorce.
“Regardless of where either spouse sits on the political spectrum and the disagreements the election results produced, there is an increase in interest in divorce following the election because couples in peril know the ease with which an individual can unilaterally pursue divorce based on ‘no fault’ may be subject to change,” said Alan R. Feigenbaum, a matrimonial and family law partner at Blank Rome in New York City. “I have not noticed this level of interest after prior elections.”
The lawyers who spoke to HuffPost emphasized that overturning no-fault divorce laws would make it harder to obtain a divorce.
“Women in particular are concerned with the restriction or elimination of no-fault divorces as they have been shown to reduce domestic violence, female suicide rates and other societal harms since their increase in states across the country throughout the 1970s to today,” Gaudio said.
Indeed, victims of domestic violence might be less likely to seek a divorce or report their abuse when faced with the prospect of a long and painful legal battle in which they would need to provide proof of wrongdoing and potentially face retaliation and intimidation from their spouse.
“The new administration’s legislative agenda may well prioritize the institution of marriage to such a degree that one cannot exit a marriage ― even where there may be an objectively toxic environment or, worse, violence ― without demonstrating an illusory threshold of ‘fault,’” Feigenbaum said. “The notion that we can have federal involvement in divorce law, or a transition whereby more states shift back in time to support fault-based divorce, is not something to be ignored.”
“That type of transition has the potential to make the divorce process more costly and painful,” he added. “People break up. Our courts should not be burdened with figuring out whodunit, so to speak.”
The issue of cost and burden on the court system is why Bond is optimistic that no-fault divorce will be less of a policy priority.
“We just don’t have the judicial resources for that,” she said. “Are people really willing to take our family law system and make it significantly more expensive? It also feels very antithetical to being an American to say you should have to stay with someone for the rest of your life even if you’re miserable.”
We may see more election-related divorces in the new year.
Although Bond fielded a lot of calls in the days after Nov. 5, she noted that many people who ultimately divorce in the aftermath of the election might wait until the new year.
“A lot of people reflect and look inward after a major holiday or event ― I would call an election a major event ― and it becomes the catalyst to seeking change,” she explained. “After holidays, many reflect on how they’ve been treated and maybe realize they can’t take it anymore. Others already know, but they decide to hold on for just one more Christmas before filing.”
Those considering divorce in this current climate might also need time to understand if their political differences are truly irreconcilable.
“I have not noticed an increased interest in divorce following the election, but I suspect that is in part due to the fact that people are still processing the outcome,” Chrobak said. “I would not be surprised if I see an increase in politically motivated divorces at the beginning of 2025, once the dust has settled a bit. I noticed an increase in divorces in January 2017, after the Trump administration took over following the 2016 election, and many clients noted politics as a reason for their marital demise.”
She added that there are certain ebbs and flows for divorce filings during the calendar year.
“We get a lot of calls in January and February, a moderate amount through the spring, a lot of calls in June and July, a lot of calls in September, and then it is typically quiet through the holidays,” Chrobak said. “People tend to want to tough it out through the holiday season before filing for divorce in the new year.”
What you should know if you’re currently seeking a divorce.
“Political differences can spark serious emotions in people,” Chrobak noted. “It is important that individuals not let those emotions influence their legal decisions as they navigate a divorce. I often recommend that clients work with therapists to help them process the emotional side of their divorce so they can approach the legal side with civility and logic.”
She also advised parents to avoid discussing their underlying political rifts with their young children.
“Find a path to resolution that does not involve losing years of your life embroiled in conflict,” Feigenbaum urged. “Whether you do or do not have children, viewing divorce as a game is a dangerous recipe for wasting time, money and emotional capital that could otherwise be preserved.”
If you are concerned about losing the no-fault divorce option before filing for or finalizing your divorce, there are steps you can take to prepare for that potential outcome. Gaudio advised putting together any relevant evidence and information in case you should need it.
“Evidence such as photos, text messages, recordings and videos could be critical to establish fault-based grounds, such as adultery, cruelty or abandonment,” she explained. “Additionally, financial documents showing reckless spending could help demonstrate financial misconduct, which may impact the division of assets or alimony decisions.”
In addition to gathering relevant information, she recommended consulting with an attorney if you are preparing for a divorce in an unsafe or otherwise sensitive situation.
We Need Your Support
Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages.
“Create a new email account with a password that would be difficult for your spouse to guess, and use this email to correspond with your attorney and to manage other sensitive information,” Gaudio added. “Open a separate bank account in your individual name, especially if there is a risk that your spouse may cut off your access to funds.”