Judge rules federal agency cannot force Louisiana, Mississippi to offer employee accommodations for abortions
A federal judge granted a preliminary injunction in a case brought by Louisiana, Mississippi and a group of Catholics to stop a federal rule that would have required them to provide workers who wanted to get abortions with time off and other accommodations.
Judge David Joseph granted temporary relief on Monday in two consolidated lawsuits – one brought by the attorneys general of Louisiana and Mississippi, and another brought by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Catholic University and two Catholic dioceses.
The lawsuits challenge rules by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that take effect Tuesday stating abortions are among pregnancy-related conditions covered by the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which took effect last year.
Joseph prohibited the EEOC from enforcing the abortion provision of its rules against the Catholic plaintiffs and employers located in Louisiana and Mississippi while the case plays out in court.
JUDGE RULES MISSOURI ABORTION BAN DID NOT AIM TO IMPOSE LAWMAKERS' RELIGIOUS VIEWS ON OTHERS
"The District Court applied a common sense interpretation of the plain words of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act," Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a statement to The Associated Press.
The ruling was a partial victory for the attorneys general of Louisiana and Mississippi, who sought a broader emergency injunction that would have blocked the entirety of the EEOC rules from taking effect across the country. That request drew concern from some civil rights and women's advocacy groups who cautioned that the EEOC rules are essential to the implementation of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.
More than 20 labor, civil rights and women's advocacy groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Women's Law Center, cited in an amicus briefing dozens of cases of pregnant workers who continue to be denied accommodations by their employers. The groups said the EEOC rules offered clarity for resolving disputes.
"The court has left some pregnant workers who need abortion-related accommodations to fend for themselves," Gaylynn Burroughs, vice president of Workplace Justice and Education at the NWLC, wrote.
The limited ruling would still have a huge impact by making it more difficult, even if only temporarily, for women in the workplace to obtain abortions, according to Rachel Shanklin, National Women's Entrepreneurship Director for Small Business Majority.
"Our research consistently finds that women entrepreneurs said the ability to choose if and when to start a family played a significant role in their ability to advance their careers and launch their small businesses," Shanklin said in a statement.
Legal advocacy group A Better Balance's president Dina Bakst, whose organization led a campaign for the law, criticized the ruling, claiming it "disregarded decades of legal precedent" that included abortion in interpretations of pregnancy-related medical conditions.
But given the limited scope of the injunction, Bakst emphasized it is "important for pregnant and postpartum workers to understand that this ruling does not mean their rights under the PWFA have been taken away."
The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act passed with bipartisan support in 2022 after a decade-long campaign by women's rights advocates who praised it as a win for low-wage workers who had been denied accommodations, including time off for medical appointments and the ability to sit or stand at work.
But many Republicans, including Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, the bill's co-sponsor, were upset when the EEOC claimed the law covered abortions.
The EEOC said in its regulations that the inclusion of abortion is consistent with its own decades-long interpretation of pregnancy-related anti-discrimination law, as well as several court rulings supporting that interpretation.
The regulations also said that the rules do not require employers to provide health care coverage that covers abortions and the most likely accommodation request would be to ask for time off to have the procedure performed or to recover from any complications.
The EEOC has said that any situations in which an accommodation request potentially conflicts with state laws would be examined on a case-by-case basis.
The attorneys general said in their lawsuit that the EEOC is forcing states like Louisiana and Mississippi to go against state law and "effectively facilitate an abortion."
Mississippi bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, while Louisiana's ban includes exceptions for cases where there is a substantial risk of death or impairment to the mother if she were to continue the pregnancy and in cases where the fetus has a fatal abnormality.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said in its lawsuit that it had publicly supported the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act because lawmakers had ensured it was uncontroversial, including some who said it would not require leave for elective abortions.
Lawyer Laura Wolk Slavis, who represents the Catholic groups, said the EEOC "hijacked a bipartisan protection for expecting mothers and their babies, imposing a national abortion-accommodation mandate" and that the ruling was a "crucial step" in restoring the law "to its purpose."
Monday's ruling comes just days after a federal judge in Arkansas dismissed a similar lawsuit filed by 17 states.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.