Roe, Roe, Roe Your SCOTUS Nominee

I really want this shirt.

In Soviet Russia, Constitution interprets you!

What I’d like to know, if anyone reads this who has half a brain and knows anything about American politics/SCOTUS, is whether it’s possible for the court to make a decision that upholds the privacy rights established in Roe v. Wade while excepting abortion on the grounds that it might (controversially) involve another person besides the person consenting to the medical procedure.

Not that I think that’s a tack Alito’s likely to take. I spent some time yesterday morning yelling “That’s BULLSHIT!” at the TV on hearing people equivocate that Alito isn’t against abortion, he’s “just” in favor of having to notify the husband/ in favor of making it harder to get an abortion/ insert your own simultaneously pussified and fascistic position here. As far as the Supreme Court is concerned, either the Constitution guarantees the right to an abortion or it doesn’t. Any attempt to “make it harder to get an abortion” is legislating from the bench, not to mention misogynistic, slimy, and theocratic.

But I keep hearing about “overturning Roe v. Wade,” and I am totally ignorant of the process thereof. Doesn’t there have to be a new court case whose decision reverses the conclusions of Roe? They aren’t going to actually try Roe v. Wade over again and come to the opposite conclusion, or stand up and say, “Everything in Roe is hereby erased from the annals of the Court,” are they? And couldn’t, theoretically, the new court case establish a right to medical privacy but rule that abortion is an exception due to the involvement of a non-consenting entity whose personhood is legally controversial? (It is legally controversial– see “Connor’s Law.”)

(Please do not leave me any notes about how abortion is murder/exactly the same as having a tumor removed/sad, but going to happen anyway if it’s outlawed, only less safely/a personal choice/any other assertion about the nature of abortion that doesn’t directly address my question.)