Local
Marriage overshadows Va. General Assembly session
GOP lawmakers sought ability to defend gay nuptials ban

Marriage rights for same-sex couples overshadowed the 2014 Virginia General Assembly that ended on March 8. (Photo courtesy of Casey Hartman)
RICHMOND, Va.–Marriage rights for same-sex couples overshadowed the Virginia General Assembly’s 2014 regular session that ended on March 8.
Attorney General Mark Herring in January announced he would not defend Virginia’s constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman. State Dels. Bob Marshall (R-Prince William County) and Todd Gilbert (R-Shenandoah County) subsequently introduced a bill that would have allowed any state lawmaker to defend a law if the governor and attorney general decline to do so.
The Republican-controlled Virginia House of Delegates last month overwhelmingly approved the measure, but the state Senate Rules Committee on Feb. 24 struck it down by a 12-4 margin. Gov. Terry McAuliffe also denied a request from Marshall, Gilbert and 28 other legislators to appoint a special counsel to defend the marriage amendment.
State Del. Mark Cole (R-Fredericksburg), chair of the House Privileges and Elections Committee, announced at the start of the 2014 General Assembly it would not consider proposed resolutions that sought to repeal the marriage amendment until next year. State Del. Joseph Yost (R-Giles County) a few weeks later became the first Republican state lawmaker to back marriage rights for same-sex couples.
“As far as same-sex marriage goes, it does not bother me,” Yost told the Washington Blade during an exclusive interview at an Equality Virginia reception in downtown Richmond on Jan. 29 that coincided with the group’s annual Lobby Day. “I don’t think the government should be involved in marriage period — straight or gay. I feel like we have bigger things to worry about.”
U.S. District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen on Feb. 13 struck down the gay nuptials ban in a case that two same-sex couples from Norfolk and Chesterfield brought against it. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond earlier this week granted a motion from Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union – which filed a separate lawsuit against the marriage amendment last August on behalf of two lesbian couples from the Shenandoah Valley – to join the case for which oral arguments are tentatively scheduled to begin on May 12.
“She clearly had a view coming in,” former Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli told Bruce DePuyt of News Channel 8 during an interview after Allen issued her decision, referring to the quote from Mildred Loving on the 40th anniversary of the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down the commonwealth’s interracial marriage ban she used to open it. “We expect judges to look at these things more objectively.”
Lieutenant Gov. Ralph Northam, who took office in January alongside McAuliffe and Herring, is among those who applauded Allen’s ruling.
“We shouldn’t as a government be telling people who they should and shouldn’t love,” Northam told the Blade during a celebration of Allen’s decision that took place at a gay-owned furniture store in Norfolk on Feb. 14. “In 2014 one should be able to love and marry who they want.”
The 2014 General Assembly otherwise proved a mixed bag for Virginia LGBT rights advocates on a range of issues that include adding sexual orientation and gender identity and expression to existing anti-discrimination laws.
McAuliffe is expected to sign into law a bill the House approved last week by a 100-vote margin that seeks to repeal Virginia’s sodomy law. An identical measure passed unanimously last month in the state Senate.
The Senate Rehabilitation and Social Services Committee in January struck down a measure introduced by state Sen. Janet Howell (D-Fairfax Country) that would have extended second-parent adoption rights to gays and lesbians.
State Del. Joseph Yost (R-Giles County) introduced a similar measure in the Virginia House of Delegates that two Republicans – state Dels. Gordon Helsel (R-Poquoson) and Tom Rust (R-Fairfax County) – co-sponsored. It died in committee last month.
The Senate General Laws and Technology Committee in January also struck down a bill state Sens. A. Donald McEachin (D-Henrico County) and Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria) introduced that would have banned discrimination against LGBT state employees. The first executive order that McAuliffe signed upon taking office on Jan. 11 was a ban on discrimination against state employees based on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression.

State Del. Ron Villanueva (R-Virginia Beach) introduced a bill that sought to ban anti-LGBT employment discrimination in the state. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)
State Dels. Marcus Simon (D-Falls Church) and Ron Villanueva (R-Virginia Beach) introduced bills that sought to ban anti-LGBT employment discrimination in the commonwealth. Both measures died last month in committee.
“I know how the system works up here and I know it was a tough argument, but I think because I’m a Republican carrying it made a statement,” Villanueva told the Blade during a Jan. 28 interview in his Richmond office. “[I hope to] help persuade that God loves all of us and in the Constitution its written life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and all of us should be enjoying the same liberties.”
A bill state Del. Patrick Hope introduced that sought to ban so-called “ex-gay” conversion therapy to minors in Virginia died last month in a House subcommittee.
“While we fell short of achieving all of our goals, this session has shown that a growing number of legislators are willing to stand on the right side of history in support of equality and fairness,” said Equality Virginia Executive Director James Parrish. “We will take the momentum we have gained this session to continue our work towards making Virginia a place that is fair and welcoming for all.”
McAuliffe is expected to call for a special legislative session later this month to debate a state budget and his proposed expansion of the commonwealth’s Medicaid program.
District of Columbia
D.C. Council urged to improve ‘weakened’ PrEP insurance bill
AIDS group calls for changes before full vote on Feb. 3
The D.C.-based HIV + Hepatitis Policy Institute is calling on the D.C. Council to reverse what it says was the “unfortunate” action by a Council committee to weaken a bill aimed at requiring health insurance companies to cover the costs of HIV prevention or PrEP drugs for D.C. residents at risk for HIV infection.
HIV + HEP Policy Institute Executive Director Carl Schmid points out in a Jan. 30 email message to all 13 D.C. Council members that the Council’s Committee on Health on Dec. 8, 2025, voted to change the PrEP DC Act of 2025, Bill 26-0159, to require insurers to fully cover only one PrEP drug regimen.
Schmid noted the bill as originally written and introduced Feb. 28, 2025, by Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), the Council’s only gay member, required insurers to cover all PrEP drugs, including the newest PrEP medication taken by injection once every six months.
Schmid’s message to the Council members was sent on Friday, Jan. 30, just days before the Council was scheduled to vote on the bill on Feb. 3. He contacted the Washington Blade about his concerns about the bill as changed by committee that same day.
Spokespersons for Parker and the Committee on Health and its chairperson, Council member Christina Henderson (I-At-Large) didn’t immediately respond to the Blade’s request for comment on the issue, saying they were looking into the matter and would try to provide a response on Monday, Jan. 2.
In his message to Council members, Schmid also noted that he and other AIDS advocacy groups strongly supported the committee’s decision to incorporate into the bill a separate measure introduced by Council member Brooke Pinto (D-Ward 2) that would prohibit insurers, including life insurance companies, from denying coverage to people who are on PrEP.
“We appreciate the Committee’s revisions to the bill that incorporates Bill 26-0101, which prohibits discrimination by insurance carriers based on PrEP use,” Schmid said in his statement to all Council members.
“However, the revised PrEP coverage provision would actually reduce PrEP options for D.C. residents that are required by current federal law, limit patient choice, and place D.C. behind states that have enacted HIV prevention policies designed to remain in effect regardless of any federal changes,” Schmid added.
He told the Washington Blade that although these protections are currently provided through coverage standards recommended in the U.S. Affordable Care Act, AIDS advocacy organizations have called for D.C. and states to pass their own legislation requiring insurance coverage of PrEP in the event that the federal policies are weakened or removed by the Trump administration, which has already reduced or ended federal funding for HIV/AIDS-related programs.
“The District of Columbia has always been a leader in the fight against HIV,” Schmid said in a statement to Council members. But in a separate statement he sent to the Blade, Schmid said the positive version of the bill as introduced by Parker and the committee’s incorporation of the Pinto bill were in stark contrast to the “bad side — the bill would only require insurers to cover one PrEP drug.”
He added, “That is far worse than current federal requirements. Obviously, the insurers got to them.”
The Committee on Health’s official report on the bill summarizes testimony in support of the bill by health-related organizations, including Whitman-Walker Health, and two D.C. government officials before the committee at an Oct. 30, 2025, public hearing.
Among them were Clover Barnes, Senior Deputy Director of the D.C. HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis, STD, and TB Administration, and Philip Barlow, Associate Commissioner for the D.C. Department of Insurance, Securities, and Banking.
Although both Barnes and Barlow expressed overall support for the bill, Barlow suggested several changes, one of which could be related to the committee’s change of the bill described by Schmid, according to the committee report.
“First, he recommended changing the language that required PrEP and PEP coverage by insurers to instead require that insurers who already cover PrEP and PEP do not impose cost sharing or coverage more restrictive than other treatments,” the committee report states. “He pointed out that D.C. insurers already cover PrEP and PEP as preventive services, and this language would avoid unintended costs for the District,” the report adds.
PEP refers to Post-Exposure Prophylaxis medication, while PrEP stands for Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis medication.
In response to a request from the Blade for comment, Daniel Gleick, Mayor Muriel Bowser’s press secretary, said he would inquire about the issue in the mayor’s office.
Naseema Shafi, Whitman-Walker Health’s CEO, meanwhile, in response to a request by the Blade for comment, released a statement sharing Schmid’s concerns about the current version of the PrEP DC Act of 2025, which the Committee on Health renamed as the PrEP DC Amendment Act of 2025.
“Whitman-Walker Health believes that all residents of the District of Columbia should have access to whatever PrEP method is best for them based on their conversations with their providers,” Shafi said. “We would not want to see limitations on what insurers would cover,” she added. “Those kinds of limitations lead to significantly reduced access and will be a major step backwards, not to mention undermining the critical progress that the Affordable Care Act enabled for HIV prevention,” she said.
The Blade will update this story as soon as additional information is obtained from the D.C. Council members involved with the bill, especially Parker. The Blade will report on whether the full Council makes the changes to the bill requested by Schmid and others before it votes on whether to approve it at its Feb. 3 legislative session.
By PAMELA WOOD | Dan Cox, a Republican who was resoundingly defeated by Democratic Gov. Wes Moore four years ago, has filed to run for governor again this year.
Cox’s candidacy was posted on the Maryland elections board website Friday; he did not immediately respond to an interview request.
Cox listed Rob Krop as his running mate for lieutenant governor.
The rest of this article can be found on the Baltimore Banner’s website.
Maryland
Expanded PrEP access among FreeState Justice’s 2026 legislative priorities
Maryland General Assembly opened on Jan. 14
FreeState Justice this week spoke with the Washington Blade about their priorities during this year’s legislative session in Annapolis that began on Jan. 14.
Ronnie L. Taylor, the group’s community director, on Wednesday said the organization continues to fight against discrimination against people with HIV/AIDS. FreeState Justice is specifically championing a bill in the General Assembly that would expand access to PrEP in Maryland.
Taylor said FreeState Justice is working with state Del. Ashanti Martinez (D-Prince George’s County) and state Sen. Clarence Lam (D-Arundel and Howard Counties) on a bill that would expand the “scope of practice for pharmacists in Maryland to distribute PrEP.” The measure does not have a title or a number, but FreeState Justice expects it will have both in the coming weeks.
FreeState Justice has long been involved in the fight to end the criminalization of HIV in the state.
Governor Wes Moore last year signed House Bill 39, which decriminalized HIV in Maryland.
The bill — the Carlton R. Smith Jr. HIV Modernization Act — is named after Carlton Smith, a long-time LGBTQ activist known as the “mayor” of Baltimore’s Mount Vernon neighborhood who died in 2024. FreeState Justice said Marylanders prosecuted under Maryland Health-General Code § 18-601.1 have already seen their convictions expunged.
Taylor said FreeState Justice will continue to “oppose anti anti-LGBTQ legislation” in the General Assembly. Their website later this week will publish a bill tracker.
The General Assembly’s legislative session is expected to end on April 13.
