There are actually three different possible scenarios that would unfold with regard to this issues, not two. They are as follows:
1. Women have the legal right under the U.S. Constitution to kill their children up until the time they are born. This was the essence of Roe v. Wade, and this is the law of the land right now despite a number of half-@ssed attempts on the part of the U.S. Supreme Court to accept some "restrictions" on this Constitutional right.
2. Roe v. Wade is overturned, and the power to permit or restrict abortion goes back to the states. This was the status quo in the United States before 1973, and this scenario has been presented as the logical result of "strict constructionist" applications of Constitutional law to this issue.
3. The U.S. Supreme Court -- probably (but not necessarily) in the form of a ruling passed down by "strict constructionist" judges -- recognizes that an unborn child must be given full legal protection as "persons" under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
There was a time when Scenario #2 was considered acceptable to the pro-life movement because it represented a dramatic improvement over the status quo under Roe, but I do not believe that to be the case anymore. Advances in modern science have made it eminently clear just how unacceptable it is for a civilized nation to permit this crap to go on, and it would be completely irrational (and destructive, from the standpoint of national unity) for an unborn child to be considered a human being in one state and the equivalent of a tumor in another.
Scenario #3 -- or something like it -- is eventually what is going to unfold. The only question for this country is whether it happens now, or if it happens 100 years from now when we are a nation of Mexican Muslims.