I have several thoughts on these matters. I'll start with what I, as a trained lawyer and deep thinker believe is so obvious. Laws that would ban pre-viability abortion codify certain religious views and minority ones at that and thus they violate the 1st Amendment's anti-establishment clause and that is the basis on which Roe and all the other cases that the Right are gunning for should have been decided--they should not have conjured up some weak foundation of a constitutional right to privacy (which is different than the privacy rights involved in assessing various searches and seizure under the 4th Amendment). Here is my essay on the 1st Amendment grounds that I published in December. https://medium.com/p/4d234daa2e71

Roe should be "affirmed on other grounds," which is a concept that I assume most people may not know exists in appellate law. The holding of a case is the outcome. If a holding is correct but the reasoning is wrong, a case does not get overturned.