A federal judge has sided with Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill and Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch, issuing a preliminary injunction against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) interpretation of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. In May, the Attorneys General filed a complaint against the EEOC's attempt to impose what they described as a national abortion regime.
“The District Court applied a common-sense interpretation of the plain words of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. When this law was debated, members of Congress uniformly agreed it did not apply to abortion. The Biden Administration continues to rewrite laws in ways Congress never intended, which violates the United States Constitution. We are grateful the District Court blocked the rule. I would specifically like to thank my Solicitor General Ben Aguinaga and his team for their continued dedication and hard work defending Louisiana and the Constitution,” said Attorney General Liz Murrill.
“The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is an important measure to support women in the workplace when they are pregnant and following childbirth. It is a shame that the Biden Administration is putting its single-minded drive to undo the Dobbs opinion and overrule the right of people to make decisions about abortion policy above the needs of working women. We appreciate the court’s thoughtful opinion and look forward to working toward a commonsense implementation of the Act, which would accommodate pregnant women while respecting state laws to protect life,” said Attorney General Lynn Fitch.
In their suit, Murrill and Fitch argued that the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act fills a gap between existing legislation: The Pregnancy Discrimination Act, which prohibits workplace discrimination on pregnancy-related grounds; The Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires employers to offer accommodations for qualifying disabilities; and The Family and Medical Leave Act, which provides unpaid extended leave for serious health conditions such as pregnancy or childbirth.
“If Congress had intended to mandate that employers accommodate elective abortions under the PWFA, it would have spoken clearly when enacting the statute, particularly given the enormous social, religious, and political importance of the abortion issue in our nation at this time (and indeed over the past 50 years). The Court is therefore not persuaded, on record before it, that Congress could reasonably be understood to have granted EEOC authority to interpret PWFA's scope in a way that imposes a nationwide mandate on both public and private employers – irrespective of applicable abortion-related state laws enacted in wake of Dobbs – to provide workplace accommodation for elective abortions,” Judge David Joseph wrote in his order granting preliminary injunction.
During debate on law, Senator Bob Casey (D-Pennsylvania) specifically rejected EEOC's position embraced in this rule when he stated: “Under Pregnant Workers Fairness Act [EEOC] could not – could not – issue any regulation requiring abortion leave nor does act permit EEOC require employers provide abortions violating State law.”
The new law received broad support from various organizations including pro-life groups like U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops who stated law advances its “goal ensuring no woman ever feels forced choose between her future life child while protecting conscience rights religious freedoms employers.” The Conference also sought received injunction.
The complaint was filed in U.S. District Court for Western District Louisiana.
###