Trump judge rules for Catholic employers who want right to discriminate based on abortion & IVF

A North Dakota judge sided with the Catholic Diocese of Bismarck and a Catholic employers association, successfully blocking parts of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) related to anti-discrimination regulations related to abortion, fertility treatments, and LGBTQ workers.

U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Traynor, a Trump appointee, criticized the regulations as “clearly anti-religion,” following arguments heard in federal court in Bismarck the previous week.

Related:

HRC blames anti-LGBTQ+ politicians for national rise in hate crimes

“Hate crimes against us are not yet showing signs of subsiding,” the Human Rights Campaign noted despite greater acceptance of queer people generally.

“Time and again the First Amendment rights of American citizens has been the subject of litigation (in) federal court,” he wrote in a footnote included in the order. “Organizations must continually sue to keep the federal government from infringing on basic and well-settled rights to freedom of religion.”

Stay connected to your community

Connect with the issues and events that impact your community at home and beyond by subscribing to our newsletter.

Daily

Weekly

Good News

The case challenges provisions in two recent EEOC documents: a rule enforcing the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and non-binding guidance on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits workplace discrimination.

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, signed into law by President Joe Biden in 2022, says that workplaces must make accommodations for pregnant and postpartum mothers. However, the EEOC’s rule extends protections to those seeking abortions or fertility treatments, which the plaintiffs argue was not Congress’ intent.

The Catholic employees association says that the rule violates their First Amendment rights since the Catholic Church opposes abortion and in-vitro fertilization and accommodations should not be extended to employees experiencing either. The rule lacks a blanket exemption for religious employers, and the EEOC says religious exemption claims will be handled case by case.

“We’re living in fear that we’ll go through thousands of enforcement actions,” said Andrew Nussbaum, an attorney for the plaintiffs.

In April, the EEOC said that harassment based on reproductive health care decisions — including abortion, fertility treatments, and contraception, could now be considered sex discrimination under Title VII.

This also conflicts with the plaintiffs’ beliefs, as the Catholic Church opposes “abortion, artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, gender ideology, ‘transgender affirmation,’ and ‘improper access to single-sex spaces,” Traynor noted, quoting the complaint.

Laura Bakst, an attorney representing the EEOC, said the rule allows the federal agency to decide cases “with full context the nature of the employer and nature of the issue.”

Chris Geidner, who a journalist who focuses on law and the former legal editor at Buzzfeed News, called the decision “an extreme ruling that, if upheld by a higher court, could have dramatic consequences.”

He pointed out that “the injunction is open-ended, includes for-profit businesses that say they’re Catholic and agree with the CBA’s positions, and is — in its potential effect — nationwide in scope.”

Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.

Don't forget to share: