A Scope for Survival: Creating a Path for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act Under a Conservative Administration and Supreme Court Bench

Authors

• Emily Easton

Author Details

Emily Easton, J.D., Lewis & Clark Law School.

First Page

181

Abstract

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, representing a bipartisan congressional effort to fill the gaps in workplace protections afforded to pregnant workers. However, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) final rules interpreting the PWFA have generated significant legal and political controversy—especially around the broad interpretation of the definition of related medical conditions to include lactation, “elective” abortions, menstruation, infertility, and contraception.

Given the current political and legal climate presented by a conservative federal administration and Supreme Court bench, this Note proposes a pragmatic path forward for the EEOC’s final rules that balances clearly defined, equally enforced worker protections with anticipated judicial skepticism and diminished deference to agency interpretative authority following Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and the polarized political climate surrounding reproductive rights. In making this policy argument, this Note seeks to create a path toward stability for the PWFA and uniformity in pregnant workers’ rights across the nation as a means of furthering gender equity in the workplace.

This Note goes on to explain how the current debate surrounding “elective” abortions is distracting from the PWFA’s clear statutory purpose, and how abortion law is irrelevant to the protections afforded under the PWFA. Instead, using the text of the PWFA, this Note explains why pregnancy-related medical conditions include abortion, whether “elective” or otherwise. Recognizing, however, that the term abortion is highly contentious, this Note proposes the sole use of the term termination of pregnancy as broad enough to subsume “elective” abortions, miscarriage, and stillbirth, while specific enough to allow workers to indicate their known limitation to their employer without further invasion of their medical privacy.

In addition, to avoid further challenges to the EEOC’s interpretive authority under a major questions doctrine analysis, this Note proposes removing as overbroad menstruation, infertility, and contraception as pregnancy-related medical conditions, using the statutory text and legislative history of the PWFA as support.

Recommended Citation

Emily Easton, A Scope for Survival: Creating a Path for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act Under a Conservative Administration and Supreme Court Bench, 30 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 181 (2026).
Available at: https://lawcommons.lclark.edu/lclr/vol30/iss1/5