Help me understand this abortion vigilante law

[tulipsandroses]

So a perfect stranger can sue another perfect stranger for helping a woman get an abortion, even though perfect stranger #1 does not have to know this woman? I’m not trying to be cute. I’ve always thought there needed to be some kind of damage to you - the person suing? I don’t get it. Can other laws be passed so citizens can sue other strangers for breaking the law, even if it does not affect them personally. Help me out here

[dalton99a]

1. You don't have to live in Texas and you don't have to have any connection to the woman.

[Jerry2144]

2. How about

A more modern state passes a law that says residents of that state are allowed to help any woman in any state get an abortion. Any person who interferes with that help or sues the helper can be sued for 100x or $100k plus double legal expenses for the frivolous lawsuit

[Tree Lady]

5. Ok one should do that and then expect

The Supreme Court which was silent on Texas law to completely tear apart any blue state law coming against it.

[Kittycatkat]

3. Good point. I don't get it either

[tulipsandroses]

4. And what about HIPAA?

So if your neighbor suspects that you had an abortion after 6 weeks, how would they prove it without the clinic confirming that info?

[Whiskeytide]

8. HIPAA will not be a factor. The medical records of ...

… civil litigants are routinely subpoenaed in civil actions. There are HIPAA exceptions for their release pursuant to a subpoena. There may be other objections available to the defendant to quash the subpoena before it is issued, but once it is issued, HIPAA doesn’t come into it.

[tulipsandroses]

10. Ok so that info would come after the lawsuit is filed

If providers decide not to comply then what? As I’m sure many will. Lawrence O’Donnell briefly touched on my original question about cause and damage have to be met before you can sue someone. He

[Whiskeytide]

6. It's a work around Roe v Wade. At it's simplest, the state ...

… of Texas cannot prohibit a woman’s right to choose under current precedent (Roe v Wade), so they cannot prosecute criminally. This new law gives private citizens the right to bring a civil action, thereby taking the state out of the equation. It will still accomplish its goal - to prevent abortion - but without the “state action” that would violate the law.

It would likely never withstand any rational legal analysis, but with the current SCOTUS, who knows?

[joetheman]

7. The law is so silly by any standard of law and justice.

For one thing, how can any citizen prove that a driver knew a passenger was pregnant? How can one prove that anyone else KNOWS a woman is pregnant?

TX will be blue by 2024...I bet on it.....

[Thomas Hurt]

9. What you are saying is what is making me scratch my head...

If the burden of proof is that any speculation or allegation will suffice then this law will have every grifter and disgruntled a hole looking for pay back and cash.

If the burden of proof is preponderance of the evidence....what evidence.

She looks like she had an abortion? She walked by an Planned Parenthood building or into it?

I just see the allegation in these case being as baseless as the election big lie.

These cases are going to eat up the courts time for Kraken level lies.