https://www.nprillinois.org/statehouse/2021-09-14/democrat-sponsored-texas-act-would-allow-10k-bounties-on-sexual-abusers-those-who-cause-unwanted-pregnanciesBackground:
Texas passed an abortion law which created civil liability for getting an abortion, performing an abortion, or helping anybody access an abortion past 6 weeks. To enforce this law the citizens are empowered to bring a civil suit against anybody who receives, performs, or assists with an abortion and creates a $10,000 liability and allows them to recover legal fees if they win. However, you are not allowed to recover legal fees if you lose. This means that at minimum if you bring a suit you will be subjecting the other party to their defense costs even with no basis, and at best you will have no liability for yourself and a $10,000 award to look forward to.
This is blatantly unconstitutional for several reasons. First being that the government doesn't get to say "I'm not enforcing the law, we had somebody else do it". Entites acting on behalf of the state have always been considered to be government actors. Secondly, you can't pass a law that gives an uninterested party an interest in a case. If I punch you and sue for damages I have a direct interest in recovering actual damages. If Joe punches Bill and I have no relation to either, then I can't sue Bill to get damages for Joe or myself because I have no interest. Thirdly, the bill defines a myriad of terms in ways that are incongruent with our understanding of fetal development. For instance, it defines "fetal heartbeat" as "a cardiac activity or the steady and repetitive rhythmic contraction of the fetal heart within the gestational sac", despite the fetus only having cardiac tissue in the loosest sense, and not having a heart at six weeks, and the presence of a heartbeat not determining viability as was established in Planned Parenthood vs Casey.
The supreme court refused to issue an injunction to stop the enforcement of this law until the issue could be adjudicated. This means that as of now you can still sue somebody in Texas for getting an abortion. This is totally unacceptable, and a blatant example of the conservatives on the court not doing their duty to preserve the constitution. It was dismissed on a technicality, however the supreme court being the highest court in the land can rule on whatever aspects of a case they want, and when something is blatantly unconstitutional they have an obligation to look past legal loopholes and strike at the heart of the matter. If this were the same bill passed to limit gun rights there is absolutely no doubt in any reasonable person's mind that they would have done just this.
There is currently an ongoing case in which the Federal Government is sueing Texas, as summarized in the following video, which I recommend. The points I outlined are contained in the complaint, as are others.
The Law:
Illinois is set to pass the TEXAS Act, which would allow anybody to sue anybody who causes an unwanted pregnancy, even if it resulted from consensual sex, for $10,000, half of which would be paid into the "State Abortion Freedom Access Fund".
This is because if you take the Texas bill and just replace abortion with any other right you can pass the same law with the same effect. Don't like gun owners? Place a $10,000 bounty on anybody who buys sells or manufactures guns.
The Real Issue:
The real issue here is that Republicans are trying to skirt the constitution and rule of law when it does not suite them, and in the process they are opening doors that any party that claims to care about freedom and the rule of law should never want opened.
This is just part of a string of similar cases such as Florida passing acts to prevent people from blocking traffic and only being used against BLM protestors, but not Cuban protestors because the governor liked their message. Don't like the results of an election? Claim fraud and shout to the heavens that it was stolen.