U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 21G— PREGNANT WORKER FAIRNESS

42 U.S.C. § 2000gg

Definitions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
As used in this chapter—(1) the term “Commission” means the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission;(2) the term “covered entity”—(A) has the meaning given the term “respondent” in section 2000e(n) of this title; and(B) includes—(i) an employer, which means a person engaged in industry affecting commerce who has 15 or more employees as defined in section 2000e(b) of this title;(ii) an employing office, as defined in section 1301 of title 2 and section 411(c) of title 3;(iii) an entity employing a State employee described in section 2000e–16c(a) of this title; and(iv) an entity to which section 2000e–16(a) of this title applies;(3) the term “employee” means—(A) an employee (including an applicant), as defined in section 2000e(f) of this title;(B) a covered employee (including an applicant), as defined in section 1301 of title 2, and an individual described in section 1311(d) of title 2;(C) a covered employee (including an applicant), as defined in section 411(c) of title 3;(D) a State employee (including an applicant) described in section 2000e–16c(a) of this title; or(E) an employee (including an applicant) to which section 2000e–16(a) of this title applies;(4) the term “known limitation” means physical or mental condition related to, affected by, or arising out of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions that the employee or employee’s representative has communicated to the employer whether or not such condition meets the definition of disability specified in section 3 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12102);(5) the term “person” has the meaning given such term in section 2000e(a) of this title;(6) the term “qualified employee” means an employee or applicant who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the employment position, except that an employee or applicant shall be considered qualified if—(A) any inability to perform an essential function is for a temporary period;(B) the essential function could be performed in the near future; and(C) the inability to perform the essential function can be reasonably accommodated; and(7) the terms “reasonable accommodation” and “undue hardship” have the meanings given such terms in section 101 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12111) and shall be construed as such terms are construed under such Act [42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.] and as set forth in the regulations required by this chapter, including with regard to the interactive process that will typically be used to determine an appropriate reasonable accommodation.(Pub. L. 117–328, div. II, § 102, Dec. 29, 2022, 136 Stat. 6084.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Such Act, referred to in par. (7), means the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. 101–336, July 26, 1990, 104 Stat. 327, which is classified principally to chapter 126 (§ 12101 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 12101 of this title and Tables.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Pub. L. 117–328, div. II, § 109, Dec. 29, 2022, 136 Stat. 6089, provided that: “This division [enacting this chapter and provisions set out as a note under this section] shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 29, 2022].”

Short Title

Pub. L. 117–328, div. II, § 101, Dec. 29, 2022, 136 Stat. 6084, provided that: “This division [enacting this chapter and provisions set out as a note under this section] may be cited as the ‘Pregnant Workers Fairness Act’.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (23 in the last 5 years), 2024–2026 · leading case: King, No. 1:24-cv-00197 (N.D. Miss. Mar. 24, 2026).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
King, No. 1:24-cv-00197 (N.D. Miss. Mar. 24, 2026). · cites it 4× “]” 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(4); see also 29 C.F.R.”
Beddingfield v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., No. 3:23-cv-05896, 2024 WL 1521238 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 8, 2024). · cites it 3× “Complaint ¶¶ 27 200–215; 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg–2000gg-6. The Act provides that “[i]t shall be an unlawful 1 limitations related to the pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions of a qualified 2 employee, unless such covered entity can demonstrate that the accommodation…”
United States Conf. of Catholic Bishops v. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, No. 2:24-cv-00691 (W.D. La. June 17, 2024). · cites it 3× “Defendants from enforcing an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) Final Rule that implements and interprets the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA” or “Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg, et seq., and Title VII, 42 U.”
State of Louisiana v. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, No. 2:24-cv-00629 (W.D. La. June 17, 2024). · cites it 3× “Defendants from enforcing an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) Final Rule that implements and interprets the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA” or “Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg, et seq., and Title VII, 42 U.”
Keiper v. CNN Am. Inc, No. 2:24-cv-00875, 2024 WL 5119353 (E.D. Wis. Dec. 16, 2024). · cites it 3× “” 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg- 1(1). Congress intended the PWFA to expand protections for pregnant employees and modeled it largely off the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).”
U.S. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Sec. Assurance Mgmt., Inc., No. 2025-0181 (D.D.C. Oct. 14, 2025). · cites it 2× “Cooper”), from her assignment due to her pregnancy-related condition and her need for accommodations. Plaintiff further claims that Defendant denied Ms.”
Neal, No. 3:25-cv-00027 (M.D. Tenn. May 19, 2026). · cites it 2× “§ 50-10-102 (2); 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(2)(B)(i). There is no dispute in this case that Vi-Jon qualifies as a covered employer.”
Simpson v. Allstate Veh. & Prop. Ins. Co., No. 5:24-cv-01211 (N.D. Ala. Oct. 15, 2024). “§ 2000e(k), and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg, apply only in the employment context, and plaintiff was not an employee of Allstate.”
Mooney v. Hussmann Corp., No. 4:24-cv-00081 (E.D. Mo. June 27, 2024). “§ 218d under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), and the Pregnancy Workplace Fairness Act (“PWFA”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg. Id. Defendants concede that “federal discrimination statutes do not preempt state discrimination laws.”
Alexander v. Two Oaks Investments, LLC, No. 4:23-cv-00406 (N.D. Okla. Aug. 9, 2024). “§§ 12101–12213; and (3) Plaintiff’s “disability-related claims” under the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act (“OADA”), Okla.”
Holloway v. Archstone Dental-Hulen PLLC, No. 3:24-cv-02338 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 23, 2025). “§ 2000e–2000e-17 (“Title VII”)2; the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg–2000gg-6 (“PWFA”); the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.”
State of Tennessee v. EEOC, 129 F.4th 452 (8th Cir. 2025). “Congress enacted the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg, in 2022. The Act declares it unlawful for a covered employer to “not make reasonable accommodations to the known limitations related to the pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions of a qualified…”
Show all 23 citing cases →
42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(2)(B)(i): 1 case
Neal, No. 3:25-cv-00027 (M.D. Tenn. May 19, 2026). “§ 50-10-102 (2); 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(2)(B)(i). There is no dispute in this case that Vi-Jon qualifies as a covered employer.”
42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(4): 5 cases
Keiper v. CNN Am. Inc, No. 2:24-cv-00875, 2024 WL 5119353 (E.D. Wis. Dec. 16, 2024). “” 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg- 1(1). Congress intended the PWFA to expand protections for pregnant employees and modeled it largely off the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).”
Johnson v. Wag Acquisition Grp. LLC, No. 3:24-cv-03268 (N.D. Tex. Apr. 2, 2025).
Shelton v. Parkland Health, No. 3:24-cv-02190, 2025 WL 1513441 (N.D. Tex. May 28, 2025).
King, No. 1:24-cv-00197 (N.D. Miss. Mar. 24, 2026). “]” 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(4); see also 29 C.F.R.”
Etkins, No. 2:24-cv-01474 (W.D. Pa. May 28, 2026).
42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(6): 1 case
Keiper v. CNN Am. Inc, No. 2:24-cv-00875, 2024 WL 5119353 (E.D. Wis. Dec. 16, 2024). “” 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg- 1(1). Congress intended the PWFA to expand protections for pregnant employees and modeled it largely off the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).”
42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(6)(A): 1 case
King, No. 1:24-cv-00197 (N.D. Miss. Mar. 24, 2026). “]” 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(4); see also 29 C.F.R.”
42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(7): 4 cases
United States Conf. of Catholic Bishops v. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, No. 2:24-cv-00691 (W.D. La. June 17, 2024). “Defendants from enforcing an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) Final Rule that implements and interprets the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA” or “Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg, et seq., and Title VII, 42 U.”
State of Louisiana v. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, No. 2:24-cv-00629 (W.D. La. June 17, 2024). “Defendants from enforcing an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) Final Rule that implements and interprets the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA” or “Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg, et seq., and Title VII, 42 U.”
King, No. 1:24-cv-00197 (N.D. Miss. Mar. 24, 2026). “]” 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(4); see also 29 C.F.R.”
Neal, No. 3:25-cv-00027 (M.D. Tenn. May 19, 2026). “§ 50-10-102 (2); 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg(2)(B)(i). There is no dispute in this case that Vi-Jon qualifies as a covered employer.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.