Relating to abortion, including civil liability for the manufacture and provision of abortion-inducing drugs, exemptions from the Texas Citizens Participation Act and Religious Freedom Restoration Act, authorizing civil and qui tam actions, amendments to the fee-shifting statute governing abortion litigation, immunity defenses and limits on state-court jurisdiction and relief, the parens patriae standing of the attorney general, and the jurisdiction of the Fifteenth Court of Appeals; providing for severability.
SB 6, titled the Woman and Child Protection Act, creates a new Chapter 171A in the Health and Safety Code to sharply restrict abortion-inducing drugs in Texas. It generally prohibits manufacturing, distributing, mailing, transporting, delivering, prescribing, or providing abortion-inducing drugs in or from Texas, while carving out exceptions for medical emergencies, ectopic pregnancy treatment, miscarriage management, and other non-abortion purposes. The bill also expressly excludes liability for pregnant women seeking abortions, certain federal actors, common carriers unaware of a passenger’s destination, and some providers who took every reasonable precaution to avoid prohibited conduct.
The bill builds an unusual enforcement structure centered on private civil litigation. It authorizes qui tam actions by private relators, bars most direct state enforcement of the new drug restrictions, and sets minimum statutory damages of $100,000 per violation plus injunctive relief and attorney’s fees for prevailing relators. It also gives the attorney general parens patriae standing to sue for violations of certain abortion laws, and it adds or expands jurisdictional rules, venue limits, immunity protections, and exclusive appellate jurisdiction in the Fifteenth Court of Appeals for many abortion-related cases. In addition, the bill amends the Texas Citizens Participation Act and fee-shifting provisions to remove or limit procedural protections in abortion-related litigation and to impose attorney-fee exposure on parties and lawyers who seek to block enforcement of abortion restrictions.
The bill’s impact on state law is broad. It would add new civil liability and enforcement mechanisms to Texas abortion law, restrict the availability of certain defenses, limit the application of anti-SLAPP and related procedural statutes, and attempt to prevent Texas courts from hearing challenges that seek to invalidate or enjoin the chapter. It also includes provisions aimed at blocking out-of-state “clawback” laws and judgments related to abortion, voiding contrary choice-of-law and forum-selection clauses, and authorizing counter-suits and damages in Texas against those who pursue such out-of-state actions. The effective date is September 1, 2025, and the new chapter applies only to causes of action accruing on or after that date.
The general sentiment reflected in the voting history is supportive among the majority that advanced the bill, but with clear opposition. On August 12, 2025, the Senate suspended rules, passed the bill to engrossment, and read it a third time by votes of 18-9, indicating a partisan or ideological split rather than broad consensus. The bill was reported engrossed and moved out of committee, suggesting it had enough support to advance, but the recorded nays show substantial resistance.
The main points of contention are the bill’s aggressive enforcement model and its effort to insulate abortion restrictions from judicial review. Critics are likely to object to the qui tam structure, the high statutory damages, the limits on defenses, the restrictions on court jurisdiction, and the provisions targeting out-of-state legal actions and anti-SLAPP protections. Supporters appear to favor the bill’s stated goal of protecting unborn children and restricting abortion-inducing drugs, as well as its attempts to strengthen enforcement and reduce litigation obstacles. The bill also raises concerns for healthcare providers, pharmacies, manufacturers, distributors, internet and cloud service providers, and common carriers because of the breadth of conduct potentially implicated by the new liability scheme.
SB 6 would add Chapter 171A to the Health and Safety Code and substantially expand Texas abortion enforcement law by creating a private qui tam civil cause of action against persons who manufacture, distribute, or provide abortion-inducing drugs in violation of the chapter. It also amends the Civil Practice and Remedies Code and related provisions to limit anti-SLAPP protections, alter attorney-fee rules in abortion litigation, restrict jurisdiction over certain challenges, and assign exclusive intermediate appellate jurisdiction in many of these cases to the Fifteenth Court of Appeals. The bill further attempts to preempt or counter out-of-state abortion-related legal actions and judgments, while preserving exceptions for medical emergencies, ectopic pregnancies, miscarriage care, federal preemption, and certain protected speech and conduct.
The available voting record suggests the bill had strong support from a majority of senators but also meaningful opposition. It advanced on 18-9 votes at multiple stages, indicating that supporters viewed it as a significant abortion-restriction and enforcement measure, while opponents likely saw it as overly expansive and legally aggressive. No committee transcript was provided, so the sentiment is inferred primarily from the floor votes and the bill’s advancement out of committee.
The most contentious issues are the bill’s private-enforcement model, the $100,000-per-violation damages scheme, and its effort to limit judicial review and procedural defenses. Opponents are likely to object to the restrictions on the Texas Citizens Participation Act, the fee-shifting provisions, the anti-clawback and anti-forum-selection rules, and the broad attempt to bar state courts from hearing certain constitutional challenges. Supporters likely emphasize the bill’s abortion-restriction goals, its enforcement tools, and its exceptions for medical care and other non-abortion uses of abortion-inducing drugs. Healthcare providers, pharmacies, manufacturers, distributors, internet-related services, and common carriers are among the parties most directly affected by the bill’s liability provisions.