That's not how I read Roe (granted that was a while ago). If my faulty memory is still good, Roe took more of a balancing test approach where the rights of the fetus were taken into consideration, a right vested in the states to make reasonable laws restricting abortion in the second and third trimesters. As time progressed, the states had more and more power to restrict the practice of abortion.
This decision makes sense in the framework of Roe v. Wade. I am sure once the decision is released, the majority will cite Roe in making their case upholding partial birth abortions.
Wasn't Casey about parental notification?
You need to read Casey to see how it treated Roe and its trimester framework. The focus now is on the undue burden standard.
BTW, while you are correct that Roe, Casey, etc., aren’t going anywhere with the current Court, one vote more on the Court could very well put the central holding of Roe in doubt.
No. One of the big misunderstandings amongst the masses is that abortion is legal only in the first trimester. Anyone can have an abortion up to the minute the birth takes place. That is Roe v. Wade.
In theory. In practice, abortion was legal at any point, with this application being bolstered by later cases.