A Biden-era reading of a bipartisan pregnancy law is now forcing Catholic ministries to fight in court so they are not turned into backdoor funders of abortion and other practices that violate their faith.
Story Snapshot
- U.S. Catholic bishops and allied ministries are challenging federal rules that twist the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act into an abortion-accommodation mandate.[3][5]
- Courts have already blocked enforcement of the mandate against the bishops and, for elective abortions, nationwide, signaling deep judicial skepticism.[1][2]
- Fifty members of Congress say the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission defied clear legislative intent and trampled conscience protections.[4]
- The outcome will shape how far Washington bureaucrats can go in rewriting law on life, family, and religious freedom without a single new vote in Congress.[3][4]
Bishops Back Pregnancy Protections, Reject Abortion Mandate
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops originally supported the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act because it promised common‑sense protections for pregnant women at work, such as extra breaks or modified schedules so mothers could safely carry their babies to term.[3][5] Lawmakers from both parties repeatedly stressed that the statute did not address abortion and was meant to help women and their unborn children, not subsidize ending pregnancies.[3][4] That record matters now, because the bishops argue they are defending the law’s true pro‑mother purpose against an activist reinterpretation.
The bishops and other Catholic ministries now find themselves in federal court after the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, using authority inherited from the Biden era, issued a final rule declaring that “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions” includes having, or choosing not to have, an abortion.[2][3][5] That reading forces employers to offer schedule changes, leave, or other accommodations so employees can obtain or recover from abortions, in vitro fertilization, sterilization, contraception, and surrogacy—procedures that directly contradict Catholic teaching on the sanctity of life and the meaning of family.[1][2][3]
The bishops argue this is not a minor tweak but a radical rewrite of the law that hijacks a bipartisan compromise and turns it into a weapon against pro‑life and religious employers.[3][4][5] Their legal filings stress that Congress deliberately left abortion out of the statute and chose not to tie the law’s wording to other definitions that include abortion, precisely to avoid this fight.[3][4] By reading a controversial social agenda into silence, the commission effectively tried to do what pro‑abortion lawmakers could not accomplish legislatively after the Supreme Court returned abortion policy to the states.
Court Rebukes Federal Rule And Shields Catholic Ministries
Federal judges have already delivered major setbacks to the abortion‑accommodation rule, signaling that the bishops’ reading of the law carries real weight in court.[1][2] In May 2025, a judge in Louisiana vacated the portion of the rule that required accommodations for elective abortions nationwide, finding that the commission exceeded its authority when it tried to smuggle abortion into a law that never mentions it.[1][2] That ruling alone undercut the idea that every employer in America must adjust its workplace to facilitate abortion on demand.
Even after that rebuke, the same court initially said Catholic ministries still had to accommodate abortions labeled as tied to medical conditions, including what their lawyers described as minor nausea, anxiety, or hormone‑related issues—symptoms common to nearly every pregnancy.[2][3] That middle‑ground approach would have left Catholic institutions constantly second‑guessing whether denying time off or support for an abortion could trigger federal enforcement, chilling their ability to witness to a consistent pro‑life ethic.[3][5] The ministries appealed, arguing that carving out only “elective” abortions still forced them to participate in procedures they believe take innocent life.
In September 2025, Judge David Joseph expanded protections and barred the government from enforcing the rule against the bishops and several Catholic entities in any way that would require them to accommodate abortions, contraception, sterilization, surrogacy, or artificial reproductive technologies that violate their beliefs.[1][2] His order blocks not only direct enforcement but also any federal investigations or penalties based on Catholic employers refusing to facilitate such procedures.[1][2] The injunction will remain in place while the broader lawsuit continues, giving ministries breathing room to operate without fear of being forced to choose between their conscience and federal retaliation.
Congressional Allies Warn Of Administrative Overreach
The legal fight has now moved to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, where Becket, a religious liberty law firm, and the bishops are asking for permanent protection from what they call a sweeping abortion‑accommodation mandate.[3][5] Their argument is straightforward: the commission took a law meant to secure better working conditions for pregnant mothers and “flipped” it into a tool to pressure religious institutions into supporting abortions in direct conflict with their faith.[3] If that maneuver stands, any agency could rewrite bipartisan compromises into culture‑war battering rams by regulation alone.
The Catholic Bishops of the US are consecrating the nation to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.
Follow along with us as we pray the Sacred Heart Novena, culminating with the consecration on June 11. pic.twitter.com/QA4KXycvUQ
— CatholicTV (@CatholicTV) June 1, 2026
Fifty Republican members of Congress have filed an amicus brief backing the bishops, accusing the commission of flouting both the text and intent of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.[4] They argue that the law’s drafters intentionally left out abortion and included a religious exemption to ensure faith‑based employers would not be forced to violate their beliefs, only to see bureaucrats interpret religious protections narrowly and abortion justifications broadly.[4] For many conservatives, this case is about more than one rule: it is a test of whether unelected regulators can convert pro‑family legislation into an engine for abortion politics, at the expense of religious freedom, parental values, and the constitutional balance between Congress and the executive branch.[3][4]
Sources:
[1] Web – US bishops challenge ruling that requires abortion accommodations in …
[2] Web – NWLC Files Amicus Brief Defending PWFA Regulations from …
[3] Web – Catholic bishops seek to block PWFA rule requiring … – HR Dive
[4] Web – Catholic bishops appeal court ruling that would mandate abortion …
[5] Web – Amicus Brief: U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops v. EEOC
