What are the verified instances where Joe Biden apologized for racially insensitive remarks?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
A review of contemporary reporting shows several verified occasions when Joe Biden publicly apologized for remarks deemed racially insensitive: notably for praising cooperation with segregationist senators in 2019, for saying a Black radio host “ain’t black” in 2020, and for earlier comments in the 2000s that drew accusations of patronizing language — while other alleged apologies circulating online have been debunked as fabrications. Contemporary fact-checking and major news outlets document both the real apologies and a stream of false or misleading claims that have complicated public understanding [1] [2] [3] [4] [5].
1. Apology for invoking segregationist senators (July 2019)
Joe Biden apologized in July 2019 after critics said he had inappropriately cited his ability to work with senators known for opposing integration as evidence of bipartisanship; Reuters and other outlets reported that Biden “apologized on Saturday for touting his past record of working civilly with segregationists” and that he said, “I regret it and I am sorry for any of the pain or misconception that may have caused anybody” as he sought to address the controversy during his 2020 presidential campaign [1] [6]. Coverage from ABC News and The Guardian described Biden delivering the apology in South Carolina and noted political pressure from rivals who framed the comments as racially insensitive [7] [8].
2. Apology for “you ain’t black” remark (May 2020)
After a May 2020 interview with The Breakfast Club in which Biden told co-host Charlamagne tha God, “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black,” major outlets reported that Biden apologized the following day for that phrasing and defended his record on racial issues; Reuters documented the apology and the political backlash that prompted it [2]. The Guardian likewise reported Biden’s apology and the immediate criticism from political opponents and commentators who said the line was demeaning [9].
3. Earlier apology for a New York Observer remark about Barack Obama
Reporting collected in a TIME retrospective records that Biden apologized after a 2007 New York Observer quote in which he described then-candidate Barack Obama as “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” a line widely criticized as patronizing; TIME recorded Biden’s public regret and his statement, “I deeply regret any offense my remark in the New York Observer might have caused anyone” [3].
4. Apology reported after circulation of a compiled video alleging repeated slur usage (2022 reporting)
Local reporting summarized in aggregated clips and an ABC7-syndicated item said Biden issued an apology in early 2022 after a social-media viral compilation suggested he repeatedly used the N-word; sources cited that he said “I’m not racist” while addressing the controversy [10]. That item is in the public record as a reported apology, though the clip and claims that prompted it drew debate over context and editing.
5. False or fabricated apologies and how they muddle the record
Fact-checkers have also flagged several prominent false claims: PolitiFact determined that a viral claim Biden had spoken a racial slur in a speech was false and noted commentators urging him to apologize even when no slur was used, while USA Today debunked a fabricated tweet purporting to show an apology that never occurred, illustrating how misinformation has sometimes been mistaken for verified contrition [4] [5].
6. Context, critics and limits of the reporting
Critics from across the political spectrum—ranging from Democratic rivals who pressed him in 2019 to conservative think tanks that catalogue a longer pattern of offensive remarks—have framed these moments either as missteps or as elements of a broader pattern requiring accountability; the Heritage Foundation’s commentary and contemporaneous press coverage highlight that debate and the political incentives behind demands for apology [11] [8]. The sources used document the verified apologies above; where reporting is limited (for instance, the precise wording and setting of some early apologies or social-media-driven claims), this summary does not assert unreported details.