actually, Roe v. Wade would be VERY EASY to overturn, on the merits anyway.
Abortion is nowhere even mentioned or contemplated in the constitution. Even the Roe decision acknowledges this,
having to “find abortion” in the “pnumbra” (unseeable shadows) of the constitution.
so that part of the nominee’s statement is NOT reassuring, to put it mildly.
as for his stated independence, fine with me, good on that.
he should be independent, but not independent of the constitution like Ginzberg and a couple of the others nowadays on the court. And, not independent of the constitution like Roe v. Wade.
See: absolute, actual, axiomatic, certain, conclusive, concrete, de facto, definite, definitive, demonstrable, explicit, express, fixed, incontestable, peremptory, positive, precise, specific.......
He's out.