With the U.S. Supreme Court mum, a new law went into effect in Texas that bans abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy. That’s well before many women even know they are pregnant.

The law allows private citizens to sue abortion providers and anyone else who helps a woman obtain an abortion — including those who give a woman a ride to a clinic or provide financial assistance to obtain an abortion. Private citizens who bring these suits don’t need to show any connection to those they are suing.

The law makes no exceptions for cases involving rape or incest.

Here’s why the law is one of the strictest abortion bans in the country.

What does the Texas law prohibit?

It bans abortion as soon as cardiac activity is detectable. That’s around six weeks, which is before a lot of people know that they’re pregnant. Other states have tried to do this, but those laws have been challenged by abortion-rights groups and blocked by federal courts again and again.

How is this law different from other states’ efforts?

Groups who oppose abortion rights have pushed for this Texas law, hoping that it will be harder for federal courts to knock it down. Instead of requiring public officials to enforce the law, this law allows individuals to bring civil lawsuits against abortion providers or anyone else found to “aid or abet” illegal abortions.

This law empowers individuals to enforce an abortion ban. How would that work in practice?

Anyone who successfully sues an abortion provider under this law could be awarded at least $10,000. And to prepare for that, Texas Right to Life has set up what it calls a “whistleblower” website where people can submit anonymous tips about anyone they believe to be violating the law.

“These lawsuits are not against the women,” says John Seago with Texas Right to Life. “The lawsuits would be against the individuals making money off of the abortion, the abortion industry itself. So this is not spy on your neighbor and see if they’re having an abortion.”

In a federal lawsuit challenging this, a coalition of abortion providers and reproductive rights groups said the law “places a bounty on people who provide or aid abortions, inviting random strangers to sue them.”

What does the law mean for patients and abortion providers?

Dr. Bhavik Kumar, a family medicine doctor who works for Planned Parenthood in Houston, says the law creating a lot of uncertainty for patients and providers. But Kumar insists he will comply.

The ban, though, will likely mean a lot of questions from patients about how they can get an abortion outside of Texas, Kumar said.

“I know that there are many people who don’t have to ability to make it out of state … The logistics and ability to do so is not an option for them,” he said. “So I’m really concerned about what’s going to happen to people.”

Dr. Ghazaleh Moayedi, an OB/GYN, told NPR over the weekend that patients are apprehensive. “They understand that the abortion that they’re having this week, last week, the week before, is something that they wouldn’t be able to have next week. They’ve been asking about it and asking, you know, ‘If I were here in September, would I be able to get this?’ “

What does this mean for abortion laws in other states?

If the federal courts ultimately allow this law to stand, it’s very likely that other conservative states will move to pass similar laws. Seago, with Texas Right to Life, said his organization is working with activists in multiple states who are eager to replicate this model if it succeeds in blocking access to most abortions in Texas.

“It is still a bit untested. We’re still working on what these lawsuits are going to look like if the industry decides to break the law,” Seago said. “So it is a new model that we’re still testing out.”

What happens next?

Multiple court challenges to the law are underway, including several lawsuits in state court in Texas targeting anti-abortion-rights groups including Texas Right to Life. Abortion rights groups are also organizing protests and demonstrations in Texas in opposition to the law.

A spokeswoman for Texas Right to Life told NPR that no lawsuits against abortion providers are imminent, and abortion providers say they will comply with the law as long as it is in effect.

A group of more than 220 children’s hospitals is imploring the Biden administration for help, as a surge of young COVID-19 patients is putting an “unprecedented strain” on their facilities and staff across the country.

Pediatric hospitals are “at or near capacity” and they expect to see more child patients as the school year resumes, according to the Children’s Hospital Association.

“[T]here may not be sufficient bed capacity or expert staff to care for children and families in need,” wrote association CEO Mark Wietecha in a letter to President Biden on Aug. 26.

“Our children’s health care safety net is under unprecedented strain,” Wietecha said in a news release. “Children’s hospitals and their dedicated staffs are doing their part, and we hope every American, the White House and Congress can help.”

There are a number of reasons for the pressure on the pediatric health care system.

The recent surge in COVID-19 cases driven by the delta variant has afflicted children more seriously than previous strains, and those under age 12 still cannot get vaccinated. Some children are coming down with the coronavirus and RSV, a seasonal respiratory virus that can be dangerous in kids, at the same time.

Wietecha said hospitals are also seeing more children with serious mental and behavioral health issues, due in part to the social isolation they experienced last year and the general devastation wrought by the pandemic.

On top of that, he said, many children’s hospitals are facing financial trouble because they admitted fewer patients during the widespread lockdowns early in the pandemic.

“All of these factors are converging and unfortunately setting up the perfect storm threatening national pediatric hospital capacity,” Wietecha wrote.

President Biden issued a stern defense Tuesday of his decision to exit Afghanistan. He also hailed the final evacuation — which saw more than 120,000 Americans, Afghans and others airlifted from the country — as an “extraordinary success.”

“My fellow Americans, the war in Afghanistan is now over,” Biden said from the White House. He added, “I refuse to continue a war that was no longer in the service of the vital national interest of our people.”

Americans have largely supported getting out of the country. The 20-year war cost thousands of lives.

How U.S. troops withdrew, however, has drawn its share of criticism. The far-faster-than-expected Taliban takeover created conditions that left the U.S. scrambling to get out. For security, American forces had to rely on a former enemy that once gave cover to the terrorist group that planned the 9/11 attacks in the first place.

Amid the chaos, a suicide bombing at the Kabul airport killed 13 U.S. servicemembers and scores of Afghans.

Biden will hope that as the exit sign gets smaller in the rearview mirror, the decision grows more popular.

The ramifications from the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, and the withdrawal from the country, will likely have long-lasting effects, and they raise lots of questions.

Here are five:

1. What happens to the Americans still in Afghanistan?

In his remarks Tuesday, Biden said there are about 100 to 200 Americans who remain in Afghanistan. Most are dual citizens, he said, who initially didn’t want to leave because of family roots in the country.

Two weeks ago, Biden promised to stay until all Americans were out.

“If there’s American citizens left,” the president said on ABC News, “we’re going to stay to get them all out.”

Facing terror threats, there was an urgency to stick to the self-imposed end-of-August deadline to get out of Afghanistan. Biden pointed to military, State Department and intelligence officials, who all urged him to not delay.

“I was not going to extend this forever war,” Biden said, “and I was not extending a forever exit.”

That doesn’t mean the U.S. isn’t working to get those Americans out, however, the president said.

“For those remaining Americans, there is no deadline,” Biden said. “We remain committed to get them out if they want to come out.”

Now this becomes a tricky diplomatic mission relying to an extent on the goodwill of the Taliban. Does the West have enough leverage to make them continue to get that done? (That’s not to mention whether there’s enough to ensure the safety of women and girls in the country. Many have their doubts, most especially on human rights.)

2. What happens to Afghan refugees and visa holders?

About 100,000 evacuees were Afghans, Biden said. Many have already made their way to the United States, but not everyone is happy about it.

“You can be sure the Taliban … didn’t allow the best and brightest to board these evacuation flights,” former President Donald Trump said in a statement, sounding like he did when he first ran for president, criticizing Mexico and immigrants coming through the southern U.S. border.

“How many terrorists will Joe Biden bring to America? We don’t know!” he added.

Special immigrant visa holders are all screened and subjected to rigorous background checks by the State Department. Many of them fought alongside U.S. troops and many veterans are the ones leading the charge to get them to the U.S.

But that hasn’t stopped inflammatory nativist rhetoric.

“How many American military personnel have to die to evacuate unvetted refugees? Get American citizens out and bring our troops home,” Montana Republican Rep. Matt Rosendale tweeted.

Not all Republicans share that view.

Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, whose office is working to resettle many of the refugees, shot back, telling the AP: “I would say that they need to do their homework.”

Early surveys find Trump and cultural hardliners are out of step with the American public. But expect the issue to become more polarized and politicized, just as it has in recent history with Syrian refugees and further back after Vietnam. In fact, Americans haven’t been very welcoming to refugees through the years, polls have shown.

3. What does the exit mean for Biden’s approach to the world?

Biden noted that just because the U.S. is pulling back ground troops from Afghanistan doesn’t mean it is shirking from the world.

“As we close 20 years of war and strife and pain and sacrifice, it’s time to look to the future, not the past,” he said.

But that leaves open questions of how Biden wants to approach that new world — and still combat terrorism.

On terrorism, he said the U.S. will not shrink from the effort, including in Afghanistan, but “we just don’t need to fight a ground war to do it.”

The U.S. showed that aerial capability, using drones to strike alleged ISIS-K planners and a suspected vehicle carrying explosives. (The Obama administration was criticized for its reliance on drones because of heavy civilian casualties in some cases.)

Biden warned ISIS-K, “We are not done with you yet,” but he said there are new threats on the horizon in the form of economic competition from China and cyberattacks and nuclear proliferation with Russia and others.

“The world is changing,” Biden said, adding, “[W]e can do both: fight terrorism and take on new threats that are here now and will continue to be here in the future.”

4. Will the exit affect Biden politically long term?

During his speech, Biden repeated points he’s made before about his reasoning for the withdrawal.

That’s something lots of politicians do when a line tests well and they want to repeat it for people who might not have been paying as close attention. That could be why Biden has now rhetorically posed the question of whether the U.S. would have gone into Afghanistan if al-Qaida had planned the 9/11 attacks from a safe haven in Yemen.

But despite the victorious spin Biden put on the withdrawal, he has undoubtedly taken a political hit — at least in the short run.

The chaotic exit put a dent in the aura of competence he’s tried to build. The Biden White House has shown it’s adept at dealing with the foreseen, but it’s the unforeseen where presidential legacies are often forged.

Biden probably won’t get away from the shadow of this withdrawal quickly, either. There will be congressional investigations — likely at a time when he’d rather be talking about domestic legislation like his bipartisan infrastructure bill.

Ultimately, though, whether the coronavirus pandemic gets under control and the economy continues to strengthen are likely going to be the most critical factors in long-term success or failure for Biden.

5. Does the American public separate the ultimate decision on leaving Afghanistan from the last couple weeks of the war?

Americans have largely grown tired of being involved in Afghanistan, but there’s a fine line in how Americans are viewing what’s happened in Afghanistan — between the war itself and the withdrawal.

A Pew poll in the last week of more than 10,000 Americans found:

• 54% think getting out of Afghanistan was the right decision.
• But just 27% say the Biden administration has done at least a good job handling the situation in Afghanistan. That includes only 43% of Democrats.

While Biden has accepted responsibility for how the withdrawal was handled, he has also been defensive and spread around plenty of blame, particularly at his predecessor for inking a deal with the Taliban that Biden says ultimately boxed him in.

When the aperture is widened, though, Biden’s team hopes Americans will give him more credit for ending the war than blame for the exit — and that what might today look like excuses will tomorrow be seen as history’s reasons.