“That someone disagrees with Roe v Wade” ...
No. The Constitution and Roe v Wade are incompatible.
Obviously you're wrong. It's been how many years now? I don't think Roe is going anywhere, and even if it does, it will be a function of politics (how many judges can one side or the other get on the court) not a question of Constitutional law. The decisions of the SCOTUS are supreme law. And once they've been around for a while, they become as permament as any other part of the document. It would take a constitutional amendment to change national abortion law. For all intents and purposes, Roe is in the constitution. That's the idiotic system of government we live under.
It is obvious that these courts will have authority to decide upon the validity of the laws of any of the states, in all cases where they come in question before them. Where the constitution gives the general government exclusive jurisdiction, they will adjudge all laws made by the states, in such cases, void ab inilio. Where the constitution gives them concurrent jurisdiction, the laws of the United States must prevail, because they are the supreme law. In such cases, therefore, the laws of the state legislatures must be repealed, restricted, or so construed, as to give full effect to the laws of the union on the same subject. From these remarks it is easy to see, that in proportion as the general government acquires power and jurisdiction, by the liberal construction which the judges may give the constitution, those of the states will lose their rights, until they become so trifling and unimportant, as not to be worth having.
Antifederalist 81