Originally Posted by logtroll
I'm wondering how random citizens will have standing to sue abortion providers if they can't show that they are being damaged? The $10K bounty is for successfully suing providers, not for ratting anybody out. Does the law grant standing for uninvolved parties to sue? Can the state grant standing to sue where there are no damages?

That seems like a critical weakness in the Texas law.
It is a critical weakness, and has been prohibited by the Supreme Court since at least 1905. How a Massachusetts case could end the Texas abortion law (Lawrence Tribe, Boston Globe). Lawrence Tribe actually argued the case in 1982.
"Decades ago, recalling the court’s early 20th-century invalidation of just such schemes in cases involving land use and zoning, we successfully invoked the civil parallel of the Ku Klux Klan Act to prevent the neighbor of Harvard Square restaurant Grendel’s Den from wielding a state-conferred veto power over the issuance of any liquor license within a 500-foot radius. That statute was enacted by Congress specifically to provide a federal judicial remedy for violations of constitutional rights when state judicial remedies were blocked, as they clearly are by the structure of the Texas abortion law.

In an 8-1 opinion by Chief Justice Warren Burger, no liberal himself, the Supreme Court in 1982 held that such veto power could easily be invoked for religious, ideological, or other illicit reasons that could well be undetectable, making the scheme unconstitutional on its face."

A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich