If you haven't registered your copyright, you can sue for actual damages which includes the money you lost (including potential money) and maybe the money gained by the person using the work.
You will need to prove that the work generated by stable diffusion is an infringement of your work and that stable diffusion is liable (this will be challenging). You could also try suing the person using the work for profit (it will need to be for profit because otherwise all three points of "what you can sue for" is $0).
Remember to register the images that you create with the appropriate copyright office if you wish to be able to sue and have some teeth (and have a better than zero chance of collecting lawyers fees from the other party)
This can be done as a "group registration" to do bulk and doesn't need to be done one at a time - https://www.copyright.gov/registration/photographs/ and https://www.copyright.gov/registration/visual-arts/
Like I said before, I believe there's a strong argument that Stability AI / LAION's use of CC-{BY/SA/ND} is likely allowed under the terms of all CC licenses due to the works being shared without alteration and with attribution, released under CC-BY-SA 4.0 (LAION) and the Stable Diffusion model being released under a permissive license (CreativeML Open RAIL-M).
The real question is if the images generated by the models need to provide attribution to every single weight involved in generating that image. That's a lot more complicated and unclear, but quickly gets into questions like "Should artistic style be copyrightable?" and "What amount of source material is required to constitute a copyrighted work?". But as of right now, I don't see how any of this is violating the letter or intent of CC 4.0