Automobile Workers v. Johnson Controls

Recalling Dothard v. Rawlinson (1977), Blackmun wrote, "danger to a woman herself does not justify discrimination." Similarly, the risks a pregnant woman assumed on behalf of her fetus were not her employer's concern. On this point, Blackmun cited a number of lower court cases that upheld the layoffs of pregnant flight attendants "at different points during the first five months of pregnancy . . . to ensure the safety of passengers." Two of these opinions, he noted, "pointedly indicated that fetal, as opposed to passenger, safety was best left to the mother."

In 1978, the PDA provided that "women affected by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions shall be treated the same for all employment-related purposes . . . " The legislative history of the act confirmed that Congress intended to amend Title VII to prohibit employers from "requir[ing] a pregnant woman to stop working at any time during her pregnancy unless she is unable to do her work . . . Congress indicated that the employer may take into account only the woman's ability to get her job done."

Any decision regarding work prior to or during pregnancy, Blackmun concluded, "was reserved for each individual woman to make for herself." The Court dismissed Johnson Controls' more general argument that its "moral and ethical concerns about the welfare of the next generation . . . suffice[d] to establish a BFOQ of female sterility." Such decisions, Blackmun said, "must be left to the parents . . . rather than the employers . . . Title VII and the PDA simply do not allow a woman's dismissal because of her failure to submit to sterilization."