Fifty Republican lawmakers filed an amicus brief May 26 urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to block a Biden-era regulation they say would force employers, including religious organizations, to provide workplace accommodations for employees seeking abortions under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), escalating a high-profile legal fight over the scope of federal pregnancy protections.
The brief supports the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), The Catholic University of America, and the civil corporate entities for the dioceses of Lake Charles and Lafayette, Louisiana, in their ongoing lawsuit against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The challengers argued in the 2024 suit that the EEOC exceeded its authority by interpreting the PWFA to require abortion-related workplace accommodations nationwide, even though the statute does not mention abortion.
Congress passed the PWFA in 2022 with bipartisan support. The law requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions,” such as bathroom breaks, modified work schedules, or leave for pregnancy-related needs. The law took effect in June 2023, and the EEOC published final implementing regulations in April 2024 that included “abortion” among covered medical conditions.
The EEOC has defended the rule by arguing that abortion falls within “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions” and the rule concerns workplace accommodations such as unpaid leave for appointments or recovery, rather than abortion coverage.
The Catholic plaintiffs sued in 2024, arguing the EEOC hijacked a law intended to protect pregnant workers by turning it into an abortion-accommodation mandate. In September 2025, U.S. District Judge David Joseph of the Western District of Louisiana granted the plaintiffs a preliminary injunction that blocked the EEOC from enforcing the rule against Catholic plaintiffs while litigation continues.
The case now remains before the Fifth Circuit as the plaintiffs seek broader relief against the rule. The appeals court is reviewing whether the PWFA requires abortion-related workplace accommodations and whether the Catholic plaintiffs are entitled to permanent protection from enforcement.
According to a press release from Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., the lawmakers’ brief argues that Congress deliberately omitted abortion from the PWFA and that the EEOC overstepped by inserting abortion-related accommodations into the law.
“Flouting the law Congress passed, the EEOC transformed the PWFA into a draconian national abortion-accommodations mandate that tramples the conscience rights of those who object to abortion, including some of the very faith-based organizations that supported the PWFA,” the lawmakers wrote in the brief.
The lawmakers also argued that the EEOC final rule weakens the law’s religious protections by interpreting its exemption narrowly while defining abortion-related accommodations broadly.
“Congress included a religious exemption in the PWFA, guaranteeing that no religious employer would have to violate its faith,” the lawmakers wrote. “But by interpreting the religious exemption narrowly and medical justifications for abortion broadly, the Final Rule fundamentally repurposes the PWFA into an unprecedented instrument of radical abortion policy.”
The signatories include Smith, Rep. Erin Houchin, R-Ind., Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., 33 other House members, and 12 other senators. Cassidy was the lead Republican cosponsor of the act.
“The intent and text of the PWFA are clear: to ensure healthy pregnancies by supporting women with pregnancy-related medical conditions both during and after their pregnancy. The EEOC ignored the statute and substituted its views on abortion for those of Congress, injecting abortion politics into a law designed to help mothers healthily carry their child to term,” the lawmakers wrote.
The USCCB supported the original PWFA before its passage, saying the bill would strengthen workplace protections for pregnant women, nursing mothers, and unborn children. But CatholicVote Director of Government Affairs Tom McClusky said CatholicVote warned during congressional debate that the bill’s language could later be used to advance abortion-related policies.
“CatholicVote was one of the few voices that spoke up with concerns over the life issues when the bill was being debated in Congress,” McClusky said. “Both the USCCB and Senator Cassidy dismissed those concerns. It is good to see they are correcting their mistake and to see so many Members of Congress step up to protect the unborn as well as women in the workplace.”