Doesn't anyone recall that Clinton appointed Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993 to replace John F. Kennedy-appointed Justice Byron White, a conservative who dissented from Roe v. Wade? (In fact, Roe v. Wade was 7-2 in favor of the pro-aborts, Rehinquist and White were the two dissenters).
In 1991, SCOTUS heard an abortion-parental-notification case. The vote was 5-4. Dissenters were Rehinquist, Scalia, Thomas, and White. (If I recall correctly, the five who struck down the parental notification law were O'Connor, Kennedy, Stevens, Brennan, and Souter.)
Clinton appointed Ginsburg to replace White, and she breezed through confirmation. He then nominated Breyer to replace Brennan and what we have currently is a 6-3 pro-abortion majority on the court.
Nominating Roberts would reverse the move Clinton made when Ginsburg replaced White. Scalia and Thomas being added reduced the pro-abort majority from 7-2 to 5-4 but it did not overturn Roe v. Wade.
When Rehinquist is replaced by Clarence Thomas, and he is replaced by Janice Rogers Brown, it will still be 5-4.
When John Paul Stevens is replaced, that is when the real fun begins. But he will probably end up being replaced by someone like Alberto Gonzales, and it won't matter anyway.
I'm a little off in my SCOTUS hist-wah.
Replace Brennan in my above post with Justice Blackmun and it reads the same.
Souter replaced Brennan (no change there) and Breyer replaced Blackmun.
When John Paul Stevens is replaced, that is when the real fun begins. But he will probably end up being replaced by someone like Alberto Gonzales, and it won't matter anyway.
The real fun begins when also Ginsburg steps down. Remember her present health is not in a perfect condition!?!