Politico:  “The Supreme Court wrestled Monday with the most significant abortion cases it has heard in nearly three decades, mulling the fate of a Texas law that has sharply restricted abortions in the state by opening health care workers and others to the threat of private lawsuits for facilitating the termination of a pregnancy.  Two appointees of President Donald Trump — Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — raised the hopes of abortion rights advocates with their questions in Monday’s arguments. Both aired concerns that Texas’ abortion ban was designed to evade federal law and constitutional review.

“Kavanaugh seemed troubled by the possibility that allowing the Texas law to remain in effect could lead other states to pass laws that would intrude on various rights protected by the Constitution — one of the key arguments the abortion clinics challenging the law put forward when asking the court to strike it down.  Kavanaugh theorized that a left-leaning state could offer a $1 million bounty against those who sell an assault rifle, like an AR-15, then claim it wasn’t using state power because only private parties could bring the suits.  ‘There’s a loophole that’s been exploited here or used here,’ Kavanaugh said. ‘It could be free speech rights. It could be free-exercise-of-religion rights. It could be Second Amendment rights.’

“Barrett, meanwhile, focused on a provision in the Texas law that limits which legal arguments alleged abortion facilitators can make to defend themselves when sued under the statute. She noted that the law seeks to block defendants from arguing to state judges that allowing members of the public to collect thousands of dollars in damages over someone’s abortion could chill others seeking to obtain or provide abortions.  ‘I’m wondering if, in the defensive posture in state court, the constitutional defense can be fully aired,’ Barrett said.”