I'm talking about this
“Women’s Health Protection Act of 2021”.
First, the comedy: The title
Women's Health Protection Act of 2021. You know Women . . . .gotta have "women" in the title because ya gotta have the women's vote. But wait . . . . . .men can get pregnant too. Right? The drafters deftly solve this problem by saying women doesn't mean women. "
This Act is intended to protect all people with the capacity for pregnancy—cisgender women, transgender men, non-binary individuals, those who identify with a different gender, and others—who are unjustly harmed by restrictions on abortion services." Problem solved, it apples to all others (?) who can become pregnant.
The serious part: This law, under the purported authority of the commerce clause and various provisions of the 14th Amendment purports to instruct state governments how to legislate. Along the way, Congress purportedly abrogates Constitutional 10th Amendment reservation of authority in state government and additionally abrogates state government 11th Amendment immunity from suits in federal court.
This is dangerous stuff. It is highly toxic to every principal of federalism embedded in the Constitution. If this law passes, and if the Court's allow it to stand, the federal takeover of state government would be complete. The Democrats who claim to be pro-democracy and pro-constitutional principals seem wiling to eviscerate federalism and democracy in state and local government instead of letting state-level democracy play out. Presently federally imposed criteria on state and local government is usually leveraged through strings attached to federal funds. This law eliminates that requirement and would permit Congress to impose its will on state and local government in any circumstance that involves interstate commerce or individual rights--which means everything.
This law wouldn't stand a chance in the present day SCOTUS. But if the Democrats have their way with the court, I suspect it would.
I'll finish with more comedy. Read the 27 paragraphs of legislative findings in the law. This doesn't read like a law, it reads like a speech of NARAL, by NARAL, and for NARAL.