EmployNews has previously covered the EEOC's Final Regulations Implementing the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), which provided clarity to employers and workers about who is protected under the landmark statute, the types of limitations and medical conditions covered, and how individuals can request reasonable accommodations.

In addition, EmployNews has tracked the status of a lawsuit challenging the legality of the final PWFA regulations that was brought by Republican attorneys general from 17 states. This lawsuit argued that the regulations, which required employers to provide accommodations to employees who have abortions, went beyond the scope of the PWFA because the choice of whether to have an abortion should not constitute a "medical condition" under the statute.

Earlier this week, a federal judge in Arkansas, where the case was brought, rejected the bid of the 17 Republican state attorneys general to halt the enforcement of the PWFA regulations ahead of the June 18 effective date, and dismissed the lawsuit that sought to strike down the rule.

The court reasoned that the case "presents a narrow disagreement over a few words, a disagreement that seems unlikely to flower into few, if any, real-world disputes, especially given the undisputed reach of the new Act and the unchallenged portions of the implementing regulation. The states’ fear of overreach by one branch of the federal government cannot be cured with overreach by another."

The bottom line: In a year where federal agencies such as the EEOC and Federal Trade Commission have implemented regulations that explore the limits of their authority, the EEOC’s PWFA regulations have survived a significant legal test. Employers may now cast aside any uncertainty regarding whether the regulations will be implemented, and must provide accommodations to employees who have abortions.

[View source.]