A U.S. appeals court on Thursday revived a lawsuit from 17 Republican-led states that are challenging a rule from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The rule, enacted in April 2024, grants workers who have abortions the same legal protections as those who are pregnant or recently gave birth. A unanimous panel from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the states, led by Tennessee, had legal standing to pursue their challenge, reversing a previous decision by a district judge who dismissed the case last year. The court’s ruling comes as Republican leaders seek to undo the rule, which was implemented during the Biden administration.
The EEOC’s new rule was designed to enforce a 2022 law passed with bipartisan support in Congress. The law mandates that most employers accommodate workers who are pregnant or have related medical conditions, such as granting sick leave or time off to visit healthcare providers. Under the EEOC rule, these accommodations now extend to workers who have abortions or use contraception. This extension of protections has led to a legal dispute, as many states argue that abortion should not be covered under the pregnancy law.
Tennessee’s Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti praised the court’s decision, calling it a victory for his state. He argued that the EEOC’s interpretation of the law was an overreach, turning the pregnancy accommodation law into what he described as an “aggressive abortion mandate.” States challenging the rule claim that they should not be forced to provide accommodations for abortion, especially given their local laws prohibiting the use of public funds for such services.
The lawsuit focuses on the provision of the EEOC rule that mandates accommodations for workers who undergo abortions, a point of contention among the states. They argue that abortion is not a medical condition Congress intended to cover under the 2022 law, and that compliance with the rule would directly conflict with state laws that restrict the use of public funds for abortion services.
In June 2024, U.S. District Judge D.P. Marshall dismissed the lawsuit, finding that the states’ claims were speculative and that the EEOC was unlikely to enforce the rule in a way that would harm state laws. Marshall also rejected the states’ argument that they would be forced to update their policies and train staff to comply with the new requirements. However, the 8th Circuit panel disagreed, emphasizing that the states, as employers, had no choice but to comply with the rule. Circuit Judge Steven Colloton noted that the EEOC’s suggestion that these actions were voluntary did not align with the realities of the regulatory requirements for employers.
This legal challenge is not over, as the states continue to push for the rule’s repeal. With the 8th Circuit’s decision, the case now moves forward, putting pressure on the Biden administration’s EEOC. Given the political divide, this rule is expected to be under intense scrutiny in the coming months, particularly if Republicans gain more influence on the commission, as seen with former President Donald Trump’s recent actions to remove two Democratic commissioners.
The case, titled Tennessee v. EEOC, is ongoing, with future decisions likely to impact both abortion rights and workplace protections nationwide.
The states’ legal team is led by Whitney Hermandorfer from the Tennessee Attorney General’s office, while the EEOC is represented by Urja Mittal. The appeal’s outcome could have broad implications, not only for abortion policy but also for how employers across the nation handle pregnancy and related medical conditions in the workplace.
Read more:
