Federal judge in North Dakota rules in favor of Catholic employers on abortion protections

Yahoo

18-04-2025

The Cathedral of the Holy Spirit, part of the Catholic Diocese of Bismarck, sits on Raymond Street on Sept. 18, 2024. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor)
A North Dakota federal judge ruled this week that a group of Catholic employers do not have to follow new federal regulations meant to protect workers' access to abortion and fertility treatment, and to shield LGBTQ employees from discrimination.
The order, released Tuesday by Judge Daniel Traynor, relates to two documents issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission last year. One is a rule implementing the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and the other updated non-binding guidance on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlaws workplace discrimination.
The Diocese of Bismarck and the Catholic Benefits Association took issue with both of the regulations, arguing in an August federal court complaint that they force Catholic employers to go against their religious beliefs.
Bismarck Diocese Bishop David Kagan said in a statement the diocese is thankful for the verdict.
'The Court has upheld our religious freedom rights and that is all we ever wanted,' he said.
Judge sides with North Dakota Catholic diocese, suspends abortion, IVF and LGBTQ protections
The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, signed into law by President Joe Biden in 2022, requires employers to provide workplace accommodations for pregnant and postpartum mothers — like food, water and bathroom breaks, reduced physical labor and medical leave.
The EEOC was tasked with implementing the law through an administrative rule, which was finalized last spring.
The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act does not specifically say employers must accommodate employees who seek abortions or infertility treatments. The rule does, however — which prompted the Diocese of Bismarck and Catholic Benefits Association to sue.
The plaintiffs alleged that in including protections for employees who seek abortions and infertility treatments, the EEOC went against the will of Congress. They also called the rule a violation of their religious freedoms, since the Catholic Church opposes abortion and certain kinds of fertility procedures.
The EEOC's rule doesn't include blanket exemptions for religious employers, though the agency has said religious exemption claims will be addressed on a case-by-case basis. Laura Bakst, an attorney for the Department of Justice, said at a September federal court hearing that this allows the federal agency to handle cases more fairly.
The plaintiffs argued it's unfair for employers to only be able to request an exemption when they're already facing enforcement action.
The lawsuit also took aim at updated workplace harassment guidance published by the EEOC last year. It states that harassment based on reproductive health care decisions — including abortion, fertility treatments and contraception — as well as sexual orientation and gender identity may now be considered sex discrimination under Title VII.
It lists refusing to use transgender people's preferred pronouns or not allowing them to use bathrooms that align with their gender identity as examples of possible discrimination, for example.
Plaintiffs claimed this guidance would restrict them from following the Catholic Church's religious teachings on reproductive and LGBTQ issues.
The guidance 'effectively requires Catholic employers to use false pronouns, to avoid speaking the truth regarding human sexuality around certain employees, and to permit opposite-sex employees to intrude into private spaces reserved to those of the other sex,' their complaint states.
Title VII does include an exemption for religious employers, but the Diocese of Bismarck and Catholic Benefits Association said the new guidance flouts this exemption.
Employers who don't comply with the regulations can face enforcement action from the EEOC. They can also be sued by their employees.
At the September hearing, an attorney for the plaintiffs argued his clients will be forced to choose between accommodating practices they consider immoral or being accused of workplace discrimination.
'We're living in fear that we'll go through thousands of enforcement actions,' Andrew Nussbaum said during the hearing.
The EEOC has said that it considered public comment, the intent of Congress and guidance from the courts in writing the regulations. It also rejected the notion that either the rule or the guidance would infringe on employers' ability to practice their faith.
Traynor last fall temporarily blocked the EEOC from requiring Catholic Benefits Association members to comply with the challenged portions of the regulations. Tuesday's ruling made those exemptions permanent.
In his September order, Traynor found that the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act rule and the Title VII guidance 'place a substantial burden' on the plaintiffs' ability to practice their religion.
He also wrote that the federal agency did not show it has a compelling interest in leaving the regulations in place, or that the rule and guidance sufficiently minimize the burdens they place on religious organizations.
Traynor was appointed a federal judge in 2020 by former President Donald Trump. He served on the board for the North Dakota Catholic Conference from 1999-2001, according to a questionnaire for judicial nominees.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX