While policy framing can strongly influence political attitudes towards them, less is known about how local contexts shape its effectiveness—an issue increasingly pertinent in advanced democracies facing growing policy polarization. Understanding how voters’ ideological fit within their region affects susceptibility to framing is critical for addressing political polarization globally.

In a pre-registered U.S. survey experiment (N = 2,978) conducted before the 2024 presidential elections, we examined how partisan minority status moderates framing effects on attitudes toward transgender rights legislation. Participants were randomly assigned to two framing of pro-transgender legislation adopted — liberal (equality/well-being), conservative (traditional values)—or a control condition. Minority/majority status was defined as congruence between respondent's ideological strength and state-level voting patterns (extent of electoral partisan domination), identifying strong minorities, strong majorities, and those in between.

Our findings revealed a non-linear moderation of framing effects on support for transgender rights legislation (linear β = -4.63; quadratic β = 1.58, 95% CI: [0.79, 2.38]). Individuals in intermediate positions showed reduced attitude extremity compared to controls. However, framing amplified extreme attitudes for both strong majorities and minorities: it increased extremity by 2% for strong minorities and about 4% for strong majorities.

These results suggest that framing may inadvertently amplify polarization, pushing both ideological minorities and majorities toward extremes. This highlights the risks of framing in political communication, particularly on divisive issues.