I'm a realist. No one is going to put the "Roe" genie back in the bottle. What we can do is get sensible about it and steadily reduce both the areas in which it's "acceptable" and the moral climate that would even tolerate it. From that perspective, I'm with zencat that it should be "legal" and never happen, because I just don't ever see any judicial or legislative repeal of Roe.
Abortion is now, since Roe, a "national" issue. That genie of making it national was unbottled long ago. The Supremes vote however they feel...so yes, Roe could be reversed, if 5 of those guys and gals were conservatives (with guts).
Remember how 15 years ago, execution of minors was not cruel and unusual, now as of last week, the same court says it is...(or 5 of them do). Clearly we have a court who feels unconstrained by the Constitution.
I do think we should work incrementally, trying to build a moral consensus that abortion is wrong, along with concomitant laws. However, secular law must follow (or lead) the moral consensus--because there are always a few who will definitely want to commit infanticide--and the state should not enable it with loose, liberal laws about it. Short of heaven, there will never be a time when abortion is legal, but unheard of.
As long as Roe stands (which was decided at a time when the moral consensus through the legislatures of the states was that it was wrong), abortion will be a national issue. Revoke Roe, and it will go back to the states, where other forms of laws against murder have always been. Without the revocation of Roe, it will never be a state issue.
I believe that unless and until the judicial tyranny we now are under has its back broken, we will not be free to enact moral laws. Judicial review itself, though with a long tradition, doesn't have the constitutional backing that its strict adherents imagine. For the first 150 years of its usage (with the major exception of Dred Scott) the justices were cautious, and kept their power under control, now they think they can nullify whatever they want for their perverted vision of the good of society. This is NOT at all what the Framers had in mind by the constitutional balance of power.
The moral issues behind the Civil War were at least as momentous. One side of this issue not only allows but promotes the very murder of infants! Our previous conflict was over kidnapping, bondage and forced labor...this one is about bald-faced bloody murder (hidden in the oh-so-respectable world of medicine)--which conflict is worse? I honestly expect to see another blood-soaked conflict in America, perhaps in my lifetime, over so called "social issues" such as abortion. If it isn't a civil war, it will be an invasive war. The blood of the 45,000,000 cries out for justice.