Any said "loophole" is superceded by the 5th and 14th amendments to the constitution. Gonzalez had a responsibility to rule accordingly.
Uh-oh, it looks like someone hasn't actually read the key plaintiff's argument from Roe v. Wade.
Under common law, this event is a prerequisite to being a "person." Please state your answer in the form of a question.
(Cue Final Jeopardy music).
Last I checked, it was not the state forcing women to have abortions, but women choosing to do so themselves. The 5th and 14th Amendments concern people being deprived of life, liberty, or property by the state without due process. They don't outlaw murder, kidnapping, or theft. Those topics are covered under common law and state penal codes.
But by your interpretation of the constitution, I am violating the constitution every day by destraining my children from enjoying the fullness of their liberty, said subject also being covered by the same due process clause. The same tenuous link of the state allowing me to do that is there.
Perhaps it is time to go back and read up what Judge Bork said about this issue of substantive due process. I might note that it was the conservative jurists of the 1870-1930 period who laid the groundwork for these later false substantive due process decisions on "privacy" and "abortion" that tilt liberal.