But that's federalism as it's supposed to be. In fact, before Roe V Wade, some states had already done that, NY IIRC. But the limitations were much more severe than anything allowed under subsequent lower court *expansions* of Roe V Wade.
The states that legalized abortion before Roe v. Wade should have been told they had two weeks to repeal those laws, or be expelled from the Union, for violating the Fourteenth Amendment.
I do not agree with the “federalist” approach to abortion. We don’t allow a “federalist” approach to slavery or cannibalism. We ARE allowing a “federalist” approach to murdering the elderly and handicapped.
That the Fourteenth Amendment DOESN’T mean the unborn by the word “person” is precisely the gratuitous assertion at the heart of Roe v. Wade. The immediate issue in 1866 was guaranteeing equality before the law of former slaves, but the word “person” meant, and has always meant, any member of the human race. There is no basis for Roe’s assertion that the unborn are not “persons” as that word is used in the Fourteenth Amendment.
You’re probably right about the current compostition of state legislatures, but at least they’re close enough to be held accountable and removed from office in the next election cycle. As it stands now, nothing we do has any chance of having an effect.