Had to reiterate that this is a States's Rights issue, not an abortion issue. SCOTUS is protecting state's rights, not the law itself.
State's rights have to have limits, or else there could be no federal constitutional rights. We fought a civil war over that argument.
For any scholars of the law, this is actually really fascinating what texas did. They created a private cause of action for citizens to sue. Abortion isn't illegal, but the threat of lawsuits has driven providers out of business. Normally in anti abortion laws, the government itself is enforcing the law, and if the law is thought to be unconstitutional, it is a government official that gets sued. In this first of its kind law, no one knows whom to sue, and it is that procedural basis on which the supreme court refused to strike down the law. It's like the court just admitted that texas had outsmarted them.
At this moment there is another federal judge blocking the implementation of any lawsuits against providers, but that could get reversed any time. The way the supremes left it, someone is going to have to get sued, pay the 10k, and then go to the court system to get the law tossed as unconstitutional. That usually involves exhausting all state court remedies first, which can take years.
Opponents of abortion are all obviously cheering these events, but remember that right wingers have federal constitutional rights that they like, too. What if california passes a law that lets anyone sue you if you say something not nice about trannies? Or your neighbor gets to sue you about the anxiety caused by your gun ownership? Federal Constitutional rights protect both sides of the political spectrum.
