The article is extremely tendentious, stating opinions as facts. It also clearly avoids the question of whether or not the Supreme Court’s legal reasoning in Roe v. Wade was correct. Even abortion advocates like Ruth Ginsburg conceded that the legal reasoning of Roe was flawed. The Supreme Court had no right to make the ruling that they did and the Roberts court rectified their error.
The “journalist” is also a sloppy researcher. Justice Blackmun’s first name was Harry, not Lewis.
“Tendentious” is one of my favorite words, and you aptly apply it here. The author just strings together the usual pro-abortion tropes.