Conservatives push to exclude abortion from new law protecting pregnant workers.

Conservatives Push to Exclude Abortion from⁤ New ​Law on ‌Pregnant Workers’ Rights

Conservatives are fiercely advocating to prevent abortion from being included‍ in the⁤ Biden administration’s interpretation of the recently passed Pregnant Workers Fairness Act ​(PWFA). This act, which received⁤ bipartisan support in ⁣June, aims to ensure that ‍pregnant or recently postpartum‌ employees are provided with reasonable accommodations by their employers, such as ​time off, seating, and breaks for bathroom and drinks.

Expansive Definition Sparks Controversy

In a ‍proposed rule for implementing the PWFA, the Equal Employment⁢ Opportunity Commission (EEOC) used a ⁣broad interpretation of the law’s ⁤language, extending⁣ its protection to include birth ‍control, menstruation, lactation, ⁢fertility treatments, miscarriage, and even⁤ the choice to have or not​ have an abortion. Republicans argue that Congress did not intend for‌ abortion to be included and‌ view the agency’s proposal as a violation of ⁢the law.

“The absence of any mention of ⁣abortion​ indicates that it is ⁢not permitted,” stated Virginia Foxx (R-NC),​ Chairwoman of the Education and ⁤the Workforce Committee, in an interview ⁣with the Washington Examiner.⁤ “The EEOC cannot draft rules that encompass abortion. It​ is abundantly clear to me that both the House and the Senate understood this.”

The deadline for public comments on ⁢the EEOC’s proposed ⁤rule was Tuesday, with over 10,000 responses submitted.​ The EEOC is required to address these ‍comments before finalizing the rule in late December.

Protecting‍ Pregnant Mothers and⁣ Unborn Children

Senator Bill ⁣Cassidy (R-LA) expressed his opposition to ‍the Biden administration’s interpretation of the law in his⁢ public comment letter. ⁤”The goal‌ of the⁣ PWFA is ⁤to ensure a safe workplace for pregnant‌ mothers and their unborn children,” he⁤ wrote. “Using it as a means to advance abortion access through regulation undermines bipartisan legislation and exposes the Commission to legal challenges.”

Cassidy, who chairs⁢ the ‌Senate Health, Education, Labor, ⁢and Pensions Committee, has faced criticism from anti-abortion activists for​ not explicitly prohibiting ‌the ‌EEOC from protecting abortion in the⁢ statute.⁣ However, ​his communications director, Ty ⁣Bofferding, argued ⁣that the Biden ​administration would‌ have⁣ disregarded legislative intent regardless.

Religious exemptions regarding​ abortion accommodations⁢ are also a contentious ‌issue. The EEOC is currently considering whether religious organizations ⁤should be required ‌to provide accommodations regardless of‍ their beliefs.

Concerns Over Religious⁢ Freedom

Andrew Langer, director of CPAC’s Center for Regulatory Freedom, expressed‌ concerns about the EEOC potentially enforcing ⁣its interpretation of the statute without any exemptions for employers. “Not only is the Biden administration pushing the abortion issue in a rulemaking ‌that should focus on ⁢protecting pregnant women, but it is also ‍using the EEOC to erode the religious ​freedom protections that Americans have cherished for centuries,” Langer ‌warned.

Representatives Foxx ⁤and Miller emphasized the ⁣need for religious exemptions in ‍their comment on​ the rule, citing⁣ the statute’s text ‌and its similarity to ​exemptions under​ the Americans with ⁣Disabilities Act. They firmly believe that these protections should be unquestionably ‍included in the final ​rule.

“The Biden administration is determined to undermine the rights of‌ the ‌unborn by promoting ⁣policies ‍that‌ betray ‌the sanctity of‌ life,” stated Miller. Foxx went even further, ‍labeling the Biden administration as “the most anti-life” in history.

As of now, the EEOC has ‍not‍ responded to requests for comment from the Washington Examiner.

Click here to read more from the Washington Examiner.

What legal uncertainties arise from the ​inclusion of abortion in the PWFA, and how do some argue that it ‌may infringe upon employers’ First ⁢Amendment rights and undermine religious freedom

Artisan efforts to support pregnant workers.”

Conservatives argue that the inclusion of abortion in the PWFA contradicts⁣ the intent of the original legislation and overlooks the rights ⁤of unborn children. They believe that the focus should be on protecting pregnant women and their unborn babies in the workplace, rather ​than expanding access to abortion procedures.

Proponents of excluding abortion from the PWFA argue that it is a ‍controversial and divisive issue that should be addressed⁢ separately⁤ from workers’ rights. They emphasize that the purpose of the act is to provide accommodations and support for pregnant employees, and that abortion should not be part of that⁤ discussion.

Legal‌ ‌Uncertainties

The inclusion of abortion​ in the PWFA also raises‍ concerns about its legality. Some argue that interpreting the law to include ‌abortion may‌ infringe upon ⁢the​ First Amendment rights of employers ⁤who have religious or moral objections to the procedure. They claim that forcing⁢ employers to provide accommodations for ⁢abortion would violate their deeply held beliefs and undermine religious freedom.

Moreover, conservatives argue that including abortion in the‍ PWFA could lead to employers indirectly subsidizing abortion procedures ⁣through‍ insurance coverage and employer-sponsored healthcare plans. This raises additional concerns for those who are morally opposed to⁢ abortion, as they would be⁣ required to contribute to something they consider morally objectionable.

As⁣ the EEOC reviews the public comments and finalizes the rule, the debate over the inclusion of abortion in the‌ PWFA is likely to continue. Conservatives⁢ remain hopeful that their concerns will be addressed and that the final rule will prioritize the protection of pregnant workers without expanding access to abortion. However, it remains⁢ to be seen how the Biden administration will respond to these arguments and‌ whether they will make‍ any changes to the interpretation of the law.

Overall, conservatives are pushing to exclude abortion from the PWFA, arguing that it goes against the original intent of the legislation and raises legal and moral concerns. They believe that the focus should be on supporting pregnant workers and their‍ unborn children, rather than expanding access to abortion services. The final decision on the interpretation‍ of the ​law will have significant implications for both pregnant employees and those who ⁢have moral or religious objections to abortion.

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases