Some might consider that Roe v Wade came about through due process of law. It had it's day in court. You might not like the outcome but the process was served.
Bad law perhaps...but then so is the Patriot Act.
As far as equal protection? Well no one is prohibited from getting an abortion. The law does not recognize that life exists as a person until some arbitrary gestation period has passed. Once again the Courts claim the ability to make such laws(regulations, in fact) based on the same reading of the commerce clause that allowed the Feds to wage a "drug war" against its own citizens.
"[W]hile Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid."
And he is right. Nothing in the Constitution gives the Feds or the Courts any power to make such laws. The use of the Commerce Clause or The Necessary and Proper Clause (also known as the Elastic Clause, the Basket Clause, the Coefficient Clause, and the Sweeping Clause)to make such law is imo, a usurption of power by the Central Government.
The first responsibility of all officers of government, at every level, in every branch, is to protect innocent human life.
And there is no longer any shadow of scientific doubt about when the physical existence of the human person begins: at the biological inception or creation of that person.
Other than the supreme right, the right to life, which other unalienable rights of the people do you apply this "logic" to?