A Trump-appointed judge has struck down a Biden-era mandate that would have forced employers to provide time off for abortion procedures, delivering a significant victory for life advocates nationwide.
Key Takeaways
- U.S. District Judge David Joseph ruled that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) exceeded its authority by including abortion among conditions requiring job protections.
- The judge determined that Congress never intended for abortion to be covered under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, a bipartisan law meant to protect genuinely pregnant workers.
- Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill celebrated the ruling as “a win for Louisiana and for life.”
- The ruling represents a significant victory for religious freedom and employers who object to abortion on moral grounds.
- The Trump administration is unlikely to appeal the decision, reinforcing the President’s commitment to pro-life policies.
Judge Blocks Biden Administration’s Abortion Mandate
U.S. District Judge David Joseph, appointed by President Trump, has struck down a controversial rule that would have required employers to provide time off for employees seeking abortions. The ruling vacated a portion of regulations issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), which attempted to classify abortion as a “pregnancy-related condition” deserving workplace accommodations. Judge Joseph concluded that the EEOC had overstepped its legal authority by including elective abortions in the regulations.
“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,” stated U.S. District Judge David Joseph
The lawsuit was brought by a coalition including the attorneys general of Louisiana and Mississippi, along with several Catholic organizations who objected to being forced to accommodate abortion procedures that violate their religious beliefs. The judge’s ruling preserves the remainder of the PWFA regulations, which still require employers with 15 or more employees to provide reasonable accommodations for genuine pregnancy-related conditions, while specifically removing abortion from that protected category.
Pro-Life Victory Celebrated
Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill hailed the decision as a significant triumph for life advocates. The ruling prevents employers from being coerced into facilitating abortion procedures against their moral or religious convictions. It represents a meaningful pushback against administrative overreach that attempted to use workplace regulations to advance a pro-abortion agenda. For states like Louisiana and Mississippi, which have enacted near-total abortion bans, the decision aligns with their efforts to protect unborn life.
“Victory! A federal court has granted Louisiana’s request to strike down an EEOC rule requiring employers to accommodate employees’ purely elective abortions. This is a win for Louisiana and for life!” stated Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill
The EEOC’s controversial decision to include abortion in the PWFA regulations came from a partisan 3-2 vote along party lines under the previous administration. The Trump administration has already made changes at the EEOC that affect its ability to make similar decisions in the future. Currently, the commission lacks a quorum to make key decisions, though that could change with new appointments. The Department of Justice has not indicated whether it will appeal the ruling, but given President Trump’s consistent pro-life stance, an appeal seems unlikely.
Left-Wing Groups Express Disappointment
As expected, liberal advocacy organizations have criticized the court’s decision. A Better Balance, a legal advocacy group that supports abortion rights, condemned the ruling as part of what they characterize as an attack on women’s rights. However, the judge’s decision correctly recognizes that pregnancy and abortion are fundamentally different conditions – one involves protecting and nurturing life, while the other terminates it. The bipartisan PWFA was clearly intended to help working women who choose to carry their pregnancies to term, not to advance a controversial abortion agenda.
“This court’s decision to deny workers reasonable accommodations for abortion-related needs is part of a broader attack on women’s rights and reproductive freedom,” stated A Better Balance President Inimai Chettiar
The ruling represents just one of several ongoing legal challenges to the EEOC’s abortion mandate, with a separate lawsuit led by 17 states also seeking to overturn the same provision. Interestingly, while supporting this particular ruling against abortion accommodations, the Trump administration continues to defend the broader Pregnant Workers Fairness Act against a lawsuit seeking to overturn it entirely. This demonstrates the administration’s commitment to protecting genuinely pregnant workers while drawing a clear line against using workplace regulations to advance abortion.
