In North Dakota, a federal ruling this week determined that over 9,000 Catholic organizations are exempt from following federal mandates that require accommodation for workers who pursue abortion and fertility treatments. This ruling comes after the Catholic Benefits Association and the Bismarck Diocese filed a lawsuit last year against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) regarding how it interprets the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. This act obliges employers to provide reasonable adjustments for pregnancy and childbirth-related needs, and the EEOC extended this to include abortion and fertility treatments, a stance Catholic groups claim infringes on their religious freedoms.
Additionally, these Catholic entities objected to EEOC guidelines on anti-harassment laws, which were revised to prevent harassment over gender identity or for considering abortions. U.S. District Judge Daniel Traynor cemented a prior provisional injunction halting the EEOC from applying these regulations against Catholic employers. Traynor, appointed in 2020, emphasized the challenges religious believers face in America today, stating the actions against religious freedom highlight ongoing issues.
The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, initially supported by both major political parties, was enacted in December 2022 with encouragement from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The controversy surged when the EEOC’s broad interpretation of the act included provisions for abortion and fertility treatments, leading to conflict with religious employers despite an exemption clause requiring case-by-case evaluations.
In their arguments, the association and diocese expressed concern that EEOC mandates compel Catholic employers to support actions contrary to their faith, such as accommodating abortions and recognizing diverse gender identities. Judge Traynor, previously linked with the North Dakota Catholic Conference, in March 2024 inhibited federal enforcement concerning insurance coverage for gender-transition procedures by Christian employers’ groups.
Attorney Martin Nussbaum expressed gratitude to the courts for recognizing religious freedom rights, highlighting issues with federal mandates that clash with Catholic values. Bishop David D. Kagan of Bismarck supported the ruling, emphasizing their goal was solely the upholding of religious liberty.
Critics like A Better Balance, a legal group that lobbied for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, criticized this decision, describing it as an assault on women’s and reproductive rights. President Inimai Chettiar, of A Better Balance, expressed concern over IVF being targeted and stressed how this ruling could further confuse the law’s application, which aims to clarify employer obligations towards pregnant employees.
The implementation of this ruling remains a point of interest concerning possible appeals from the Justice Department. Although the EEOC has refrained from commenting on the ruling, there’s anticipation of policy shifts, particularly under Andrea Lucas, the EEOC’s new acting chair and a Republican. The Catholic Benefits Association, which serves numerous Catholic organizations and employees, remains a focal entity in this ongoing legal discourse.