News
Looking back: Gay mentions during State of the Union
Clinton, Bush and Obama addressed gays during speeches before Congress

Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama each mentioned issues relevant to the LGBT community during their State of the Union addresses. (Photos public domain)
The State of the Union address is considered a pivotal speech for U.S. presidents in shaping their agenda for the year ahead, and the last three haven’t shied from including LGBT people in their proposed policies.
Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama each made references to policy items affecting LGBT people. Clinton was the first, Bush’s proposed policies were entirely negative and Obama has incorporated LGBT people into his speeches consistently.
The Washington Blade has complied a list of mentions of LGBT issues in State of the Union speeches, all of which were made in recent times. The list doesn’t include mentions of HIV-related items, although Clinton, Bush and Obama each called on Congress to appropriate funds to combat the disease in their speeches.
1999 — Clinton calls for hate crimes, ENDA passage
President Clinton made a reference to two pieces of landmark legislation during his 1999 State of the Union, calling on Congress to pass hate crimes protections legislation and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
“Discrimination or violence because of race or religion, ancestry or gender, disability or sexual orientation, is wrong, and it ought to be illegal,” Clinton said. “Therefore, I ask Congress to make the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and the Hate Crimes Prevention Act the law of the land.”
After the murder of gay college student Matthew Shepard near Laramie, Wyo., in 1996, Clinton had endorsed legislation to make violent crimes based on anti-gay animus part of federal law. Clinton was also known as a supporter of ENDA, a bill that in its current version would bar workplace discrimination against LGBT people.
2000 – Clinton makes first explicit reference of ‘gay’
The next year, Clinton tried again to encourage Congress to pass hate crimes protection legislation and ENDA, saying for the first time during a State of the Union address the word “gay.”
Clinton made the appeal to pass both pieces of legislation when talking about incidents of hate crimes against minorities throughout the country.
“We saw a young man murdered in Wyoming just because he was gay,” Clinton said. “Last year we saw the shootings of African Americans, Asian Americans, and Jewish children just because of who they were. This is not the American way, and we must draw the line. I ask you to draw that line by passing without delay the Hate Crimes Prevention Act and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.”
After Clinton’s call, hate crimes legislation received a floor vote in 2000 as part of an amendment to the major Pentagon budget legislation. No attempt was made to pass ENDA on the floor that year.
Congress passed hate crimes legislation nine years later under President Obama; ENDA continues to languish in Congress and no explicit federal non-discrimination protections for LGBT workers are in place.
2004 — Bush calls for anti-gay constitutional amendment
Preparing for his re-election campaign, President George W. Bush made a reference in his 2004 State of the Union speech affecting gay people, but in a negative way.
In the year after the Massachusetts Supreme Court legalized marriage equality, Bush used his speech to call for a U.S. constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, saying “a strong America must also value the institution of marriage.”
“Activist judges, however, have begun redefining marriage by court order, without regard for the will of the people and their elected representatives,” Bush said. “On an issue of such great consequence, the people’s voice must be heard. If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process. Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage.”
Following his call for a Federal Marriage Amendment, both chambers of the Republican-controlled Congress vote on the measure, but the measure failed in both chambers.
Bush’s call for the amendment so invoked the ire of then-San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, who was present in the audience, that he elected on his own to issue marriage licenses to gay couples in San Francisco City Hall. His actions were later rescinded by the California Supreme Court.
2005 — Bush renews call for federal marriage amendment
Fresh off his re-election win after campaigning on a Federal Marriage Amendment and the passage of 11 state constitutional anti-gay marriage amendments, Bush renewed his call for a Federal Marriage Amendment.
“Because marriage is a sacred institution and the foundation of society, it should not be redefined by activist judges,” Bush said. “For the good of families, children, and society, I support a constitutional amendment to protect the institution of marriage.”
Although Congress had additional Republican majorities since the previous votes in 2004, the measure failed yet again in both the House and the Senate.
2006 — Bush isn’t done with the FMA
Despite the previous failures of the Federal Marriage Amendment, Bush continued to express concerns about the advancement of same-sex marriage in his 2006 State of the Union address.
“Yet many Americans, especially parents, still have deep concerns about the direction of our culture and the health of our most basic institutions,” Bush said. “They’re concerned about unethical conduct by public officials and discouraged by activist courts that try to redefine marriage.”
That would be the last time Bush would express concerns about same-sex marriage during a State of the Union address. On Election Day in 2006, Democrats won control of both chambers of Congress, giving them control of the floor.
2009 — Obama omits gays from first speech
Although he would later be known for building a record on LGBT rights, President Obama made no explicit reference to LGBT issues during a speech before a joint session of Congress during his first year in office. All his future speeches would make some reference to gay-related issues.
The omission is in line with the perception that Obama was reluctant to tackle LGBT issues, which had proved thorny for President Clinton during his first year in office.
Because the speech was at the start of his first term, the address also technically wasn’t a State of the Union address, but a speech before a joint session of Congress.
2010 — Obama pledges to work to repeal “Don’t Ask’
Obama’s first mention of any gay issue during a State of the Union address was in 2010 in which he pledged to move forward with the process of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal.
“This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are,” Obama said.
Amid increasing pressure for Obama to act on ending the ban on openly gay service members, LGBT advocates widely praised the words — even those critical of him for not taking executive action to stop the discharges.
And Obama’s words during the speech were prophetic. After a 10-month study at the Pentagon and long struggle of moving legislation through the Congress to repeal the 1993 law, Obama signed legislation at the end of the year repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
2011 — Obama pledges to finish the job on ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal
A month after having signed the repeal into law, Obama made another reference to the ban on open service by pledging to certify “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” by the end of the year.
“Our troops come from every corner of this country,” Obama said. “They’re black, white, Latino, Asian, Native American. They are Christian and Hindu, Jewish and Muslim. And yes, we know that some of them are gay. Starting this year, no American will be forbidden from serving the country they love because of who they love.”
Although President Obama signed repeal legislation in the previous month, the ban would only be lifted after he, the defense secretary and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certified the military was ready for repeal.
With no timetable included in the repeal legislation for when certification would have to take place, Obama’s words allayed concerns the process would go on indefinitely with no formal lifting of the ban on open service.
But Obama immediately giving those reassurances called on colleges to allow military recruiters on campuses. Many had barred there presence because they perceived the ban on open service as discriminatory.
“And with that change, I call on all our college campuses to open their doors to our military recruiters and ROTC,” Obama said. “It is time to leave behind the divisive battles of the past. It is time to move forward as one nation.”
Those words drew concern from transgender advocates because although the ban on openly gay service was lifted, the ban on openly trans service was — and remains — still in place.
2012 — Obama includes gays in shout-out to U.S. troops
As part of a general effort to tout “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal heading into his re-election campaign, Obama in his 2012 State of the Union listed gay troops as among those serving in the armed forces.
“When you put on that uniform, it doesn’t matter if you’re black or white, Asian, Latino, Native American; conservative, liberal; rich, poor; gay, straight,” Obama said.
By this time, certification for open service in the U.S. military had already taken place months ago in September and gay service members were serving openly without fear of discharge.
But that was the only explicit LGBT mention during the State of the Union address, prompting advocates at the time to express disappointment he went no further.
2013 — Obama touts benefits for gay troops
Obama won praise from advocates for his 2013 State of the Union speech by making two references to the gay community, one overt and the other less explicit.
The most overt reference was an appeal to the nation to agree that gay service members are entitled to the same spousal benefits as straight troops.
“We will ensure equal treatment for all servicemembers and equal benefits for their families, gay and straight,” Obama said.
Just weeks earlier under significant pressure from LGBT advocates, the Pentagon pledged to move forward with partner benefits for gay troops available under the law and would have them in place later in the year.
But he also made an implicit gay reference early on in the speech by saying he wants the economy to work for Americans regardless of “who you love” — an apparent reference to gay people that some took as a veiled reference to ENDA.
“It is our unfinished task to restore the basic bargain that built this country: the idea that if you work hard and meet your responsibilities, you can get ahead, no matter where you come from, no matter what you look like or who you love,” Obama said.
2014 — What will happen?
It remains to be seen whether Obama will make any LGBT references in his 2014 State of the Union address on Tuesday. LGBT advocates are calling on him to ask Congress to pass ENDA, pledge to sign an executive order barring LGBT discrimination among federal contractors and explicitly use the word “transgender.”
Senegal
Senegalese president signs bill that further criminalizes homosexuality
Measure passed in National Assembly with near unanimous support
Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye on Tuesday signed into law a bill that further criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual relations in the country.
Lawmakers in the African country on March 11 nearly unanimously passed the measure that increases the penalty for anyone convicted of engaging in consensual same-sex sexual relations from one to five years in prison to five to 10 years. The bill that Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko introduced also prohibits the “promotion” or “financing” of homosexuality in Senegal.
Reuters on March 16 reported MassResistance, an anti-LGBTQ group based in the U.S., worked with Senegalese groups that support the bill. Volker Türk, the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, is among those who urged Faye not to sign it.
The Senegalese National Assembly in 2021 rejected a bill that would have further criminalized homosexuality in the country.
Police in February arrested a dozen men and charged them with committing “unnatural acts.”
Maryland’s legislative caucuses outlined their legislative priorities heading into the final weeks of the 2026 General Assembly during a joint press conference on March 24.
The press conference was titled “We are Maryland,” where a representative for each of the legislative caucuses outlined priorities.
State Del. Kris Fair (D-Frederick County) of the LGBTQ+ Caucus opened the press conference with a statement on the unity of Maryland’s caucus.
“Together we can show our state and our community a different world, one where we mutually support one another and through that support uplift every Marylander,” he said.
In a press conference on March 5, the LGBTQ+ Caucus outlined its top legislative priorities. Fair highlighted two of those bills again during the “We are Maryland” press conference.
The first of the two highlighted pieces of legislation was Senate Bill 626 and House Bill 1589.
The bills would simplify the process of updating an individual’s birth certificate and align the Department of Health and DMV systems to reflect those changes. The bill is being led by state Sen. Clarence Lam (D-Anne Arundel and Howard Counties) and state Del. Ashanti Martinez (D-Prince George’s County).
The second piece of legislation is Senate Bill 950 and House Bill 1209, which would update and modernize laws and regulations around so-called conversion therapy. The bills have failed to pass either chamber thus far. They are being led by state Sen. Cheryl Kagan (D-Montgomery County) and state Del. Bonnie Cullison (D-Montgomery County).
(The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled against a Colorado law that bans so-called conversion therapy for minors. Maryland is among the U.S. jurisdictions that prohibit the widely discredited practice for anyone under 18.)
Martinez and Lam have introduced bills in their respective chambers that would expand PrEP access in Maryland. Martinez did not attend the press conference, and Fair did not mention it when he spoke.
State Del. N. Scott Phillips (D-Baltimore County) represented the Black Caucus during the press conference. State Del. Dana Jones (D-Anne Arundel County) spoke on behalf of the Women’s Caucus, State Del. Teresa Woorman (D-Montgomery County) represented the Latino Caucus, and State Del. Lily Qi (D-Montgomery County) represented the Asian-American and Pacific Islander Caucus. State Del. Jared Solomon (D-Montgomery County) represented the Jewish Caucus, and state Del. Sean Stinnett (D-Baltimore County) represented the Muslim Caucus during the press conference.
Solomon ended the press conference by explaining the importance of all the caucuses coming out together.
“We are stronger when we’re together, and many of these issues that we have talked about, again, impact all of us,” said Solomon.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court rules against Colo. law banning conversion therapy for minors
8-1 decision could have sweeping impact
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled against a Colorado law that bans so-called conversion therapy for minors.
The justices last October heard oral arguments in Chiles v. Salazar. Today they ruled 8-1 in favor of Kaley Chiles, a Christian therapist who challenged the 2019 law.
In the case, which was heard by the justices in October 2025, Chiles successfully argued to the court that the law restricting this type of therapy was unconstitutional, leading to it being struck down.
The Supreme Court ultimately found that lower state and federal courts has “erred by failing to apply sufficiently rigorous First Amendment scrutiny,” ultimately reversing the widely discredited “medical” treatment that has support by a very narrow margin of mental health specialists — specifically religious and socially conservative ones. This is despite the fact that Colorado state officials have never enforced the measure in practice, and included a religious exemption for people “engaged in the practice of religious ministry.” The now moot law carried fines of up to $5,000 for each violation and possible suspension or revocation of a counselor’s license.
In the ruling, the court said the law, that specifically applies to talk therapy “impermissibly” interferes with free speech rights of Americans, and despite it being “regard[ed] its policy as essential to public health and safety, but the First Amendment stands as a shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech in this country,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for himself and seven other justices from across the ideological spectrum who overturned the low court’s ruling. He went on to add that the original ban “trains directly on the content of her speech and permits her to express some viewpoints but not others.”
Only Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, which included an in depth summary of her departure from the other eight justices, explaining her fears about the verdict — and its eventual chilling effect on legislation that could attempts to restrict regulatory speech for religious attitudes— despite that these regulations are often made as a direct creation of years of essentially unanimous research, and are vetted though regulatory boards for specific jobs.
“This decision might make speech-only therapies and other medical treatments involving practitioner speech effectively unregulatable,” Jackson wrote on page 32 of the 35-page opinion issued by court in response to her opposing eight members comments on the bench.
Since the ruling late Tuesday morning, a slew of LGBTQ advocacy groups, as well as groups promoting LGBTQ discrimination, have issued statements on the direct impact this will have across the country for LGBTQ people.
Democratic Senator, running for reelection in Colorado, John Hickenlooper issued a condemnation of the practice on his X (formerly Twitter). “Conversion therapy is cruel and inhumane, plain and simple. This SCOTUS decision is dangerous for LGBTQ+ Americans,” Our LGBTQ+ community deserves safety, acceptance, and love. We won’t ever let up in our fight for a better nation.”
Conversion therapy is cruel and inhumane, plain and simple. This SCOTUS decision is dangerous for LGBTQ+ Americans.,” the former Governor said on the platform. “Our LGBTQ+ community deserves safety, acceptance, and love. We won’t ever let up in our fight for a better nation.”
Polly Crozier, director of family advocacy at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD Law), provided a statement to the Washington Blade on the court’s decision.
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling limited Colorado’s statute that preemptively shielded minors from conversion therapy, but it leaves open avenues for states to protect families from harmful, unscrupulous, and misleading practices that divide parents from their children and put LGBTQ+ youth at risk,” Crozier wrote, pointing to the overwhelming evidence on conversion therapy that argues this type of regulatory legislation is helping those suffering rather than harming. “The evidence is clear that conversion practices lead to increased anxiety, depression, and suicidality. This is a dangerous practice that has been condemned by every major medical association in the country. Today’s decision does not change the science, and it does not change the fact that conversion therapists who harm patients will still face legal consequences, and that family advocates, mental health practitioners, and all of us who care about the wellbeing of youth will continue working to shield LGBTQ+ young people and their families from this dangerous practice.”
Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson, who leads the nation’s largest LGBTQ advocacy group, also provided a statement, calling the courts choice a “reckless decision.” The statement also points out how their own data (from the group’s philanthropic arm of the organization) was cited in Brown Jackson’s dissent in the amicus brief.
“The court has weaponized free-speech in order to prioritize anti-LGBTQ+ bias over the safety, health and wellbeing of children,” her statement reads. “So-called ‘conversion therapy’ is pseudoscience, not real therapy. It has been condemned by every mainstream medical and mental health association and harms families, traumatizes children, and robs people of their faith communities. It is cruel and should never be offered under the guise of legitimate mental healthcare. To undermine protections that keep kids and families safe from these abusive practices is shocking — and our children deserve better.”
Liberty Counsel, a nonprofit, tax-exempt Christian ministry that uses litigation to promote evangelical Christian values and limit LGBTQ protections, which was designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, was also cited in the court’s amicus brief, but in support of overturning the law.
“The U.S. Supreme Court’s resounding decision in Chiles v. Salazar is a major victory for the integrity of the counseling profession,” Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Council said today. “This ruling ensures the government cannot strip the First Amendment away from licensed counselors and dictate a state-mandated ideology between counselor and client. Talk therapy is speech, and the government has no authority to restrict that speech to just one viewpoint. Counseling bans can now be struck down nationwide so that people can get the counseling they need.”
GLAAD, one of the nation’s oldest non-profit organizations focused on LGBTQ advocacy and cultural change issued a statement pon the verdict, emphasizing what multiple advocate groups have said – this decision will impact an already vulnerable youth population at an elevated high risk.
“The Court once again prioritized malice over best practice medicine,” Sarah Kate Ellis, President and CEO of GLAAD said in a statement. “In the face of this harmful decision, we need to amplify the voices of survivors of this dangerous and disproven practice, and continue to hold anyone who peddles in this junk science liable.”
Truth Wins Out, an organization that works towards “advancing liberty and democracy through protecting the rights of LGBTQ people and other minorities” called out the court’s majority opinion for its potential for religious extremism and spread of disinformation.
“This ruling is a profound failure of both logic and moral responsibility that confuses ‘free speech’ with ‘false speech’,” Wayne Besen, the Executive Director of Truth Wins Out said in a comment. ” It opens the door for quackery to flourish and allows practitioners of a thoroughly debunked practice to continue harming LGBTQ youth under a thin veneer of legitimacy
Adrian Shanker, the former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Health Policy at Health and Human Services under President Biden, who also led LGBTQI+ policy at the agency spoke about the detrimental impact this will have on rules and regulations within the healthcare field that are supposed to be inherently secular by nature.
“No matter what the Supreme Court decided today, it is irrefutable that conversion therapy is harmful to the health and wellbeing of LGBTQI+ youth,” Shanker told the Blade, continuing the Trump Administration’s choice to no longer formally support LGBTQ inclusive policy. “That’s why in the Biden administration we advanced policies to safeguard youth from this harmful practice.”
In an consistently updated document started in 2018 that cites the major harms risks conversion therapy poses to LGBTQ people, the Trevor Project, the leading suicide prevention and crisis intervention organization for LGBTQ young people, included that the federal government’s own research proved the practice at best questionable and at worst deadly.
In a 2023 report entitled Moving Beyond Change Efforts: Evidence and Action to Support and Affirm LGBTQI+ Youth, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration stressed that “[sexual orientation and gender identity] change efforts are harmful practices that are never appropriate with LGBTQI+
youth, and efforts are needed to end these practices,” the summary of the fight against conversion therapy in the U.S. reads.
More than 20 states and D.C. banned the widely discredited practice for minors prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling.
The Blade last October spoke to conversion therapy survivors after the justices heard oral arguments in the Chiles case.
-
Out & About4 days agoCelebrate cherry blossoms the drag way
-
Botswana4 days agoLorato ke Lorato: marriage equality, democracy, and the unfinished work of justice in Botswana
-
Japan4 days agoJapanese Supreme Court to consider marriage equality
-
Opinions4 days agoThe outrage economy is not the LGBTQ community
