Protecting State Sovereignty and Religious Freedom
On the second anniversary of the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a federal judge has issued a significant ruling against the Biden administration’s efforts to circumnavigate the Constitution and attempt to mandate abortion accommodations.
The Dobbs decision returned the issue of abortion to the “people’s elected representatives,” ruling that the U.S. Constitution does not provide a right to abortion and emphasizing the Constitution’s protection of the fundamental right to life.
A failed attempt to reinterpret a 2022 Act
In response, the Biden administration attempted to enforce a new rule through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that interprets the 2022 Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) as requiring employers to facilitate elective abortions. This move has been blocked by U.S. District Judge David Joseph of the Western District of Louisiana, who issued a preliminary injunction.
The injunction prevents the EEOC from implementing the new Final Rule in Louisiana and Mississippi, as well as for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Roman Catholic Dioceses of Lafayette and Lake Charles, and the Catholic University of America. These states and organizations had brought consolidated lawsuits against the rule.
Judge Joseph found the EEOC’s interpretation “disingenuous,” noting that the PWFA does not mention abortion, yet the Final Rule’s implementation guidance references it 348 times. “The legislative history unambiguously confirms that Congress did not intend” to include abortion in the PWFA, he stated, emphasizing that the EEOC “clearly exceeded its authority.”
The 2022 PWFA requires employers with 15 or more employees to accommodate the “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions” of qualified employees. However, the EEOC’s Final Rule controversially included elective abortion in this definition.
Lack of congressional intent
The judge’s ruling highlights the lack of congressional intent to mandate abortion accommodations. Judge Joseph wrote, “Not only is the EEOC unable to point to any language in the PWFA empowering it to mandate the accommodation of elective abortions, but there can be little doubt in today’s political environment that any version of the PWFA that included an abortion accommodation requirement would have failed to pass Congress.”
Furthermore, the Court criticized the EEOC’s arguments as “semantic gymnastics,” aligning with the plaintiffs’ view that elective abortion is a medical “procedure” rather than a condition requiring accommodation.
The ruling also underscored the adverse impact on religious organizations, stating that the Final Rule forces them to choose between violating their convictions or employment discrimination law, thereby constituting injury. Additionally, the judge noted the rule’s inconsistency with pro-life laws in Louisiana and Mississippi, labeling the EEOC’s actions as “destructive of state sovereignty.”
Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver praised the decision, stating, “This is another lawless act by the Biden administration that will not stand. The structure of American government simply does not allow a federal agency to circumvent Congress to impose its will.”
The Final Rule, which went into effect elsewhere on June 18, 2024, remains blocked in the states and organizations involved in the lawsuit until a final judgment is rendered.
