The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA”) was enacted in 2023 with the intention of providing stronger protections for workers facing workplace discrimination due to pregnancy. However, the current legal landscape threatens the protections for one group of workers: those having an abortion. The PWFA requires that employers provide reasonable accommodations for employees experiencing limitations associated with pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. However, ambiguity in the Act, especially about what constitutes a “related medical condition,” has led to disagreement over whether having an abortion should be included as a protected medical condition.

After the PWFA was signed into law, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) issued guidance on the statute’s interpretation as instructed by Congress. In this guidance, the EEOC confirmed that abortion is a protected condition under the PWFA. However, this interpretation faces significant opposition from anti-abortion activists, in addition to judicial challenges. Although this interpretation is supported by the evolution of pregnancy-related employment discrimination protections, it is threatened by the present condition of the administrative state; specifically, the Supreme Court decision overturning Chevron deference, and the current EEOC leadership. This Note will demonstrate that the correct statutory interpretation of the PWFA, regardless of the EEOC’s guidance, supports the inclusion of having an abortion as a related medical condition. Thus, courts should uphold the EEOC’s original interpretation, ensuring that the reproductive health decisions of workers, whether elective or medically indicated, are not impacted by workplace discrimination.