If Roe vs. Wade is Overturned, is that the end for Griswold vs. Connecticut as well?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

     According to Gallup, 92% of Americans find birth control morally acceptable. It is highly unlikely that any states would challenge Griswold.

It's possible that some Brownback-style turboconservative Catholic governor would try to restrict Plan B or something in a way that would become a Griswold issue, but the idea of any state trying to ban, say, condoms or diaphragms (which the law at issue in Griswold did ban!) is a sectionalist DINK acid nightmare with no basis in what public opinion or political will is actually like even in non-Atlas-garnet-red states.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

That line of argument shows a presumption of bad faith that doesn't really become you, brucejoel. Obviously the current SCOTUS majority thinks, acts, and justifies its actions in bad faith, but there are many, many people, including many who support lax abortion laws as a matter of policy, who do not find traditional substantive due process jurisprudence convincing and/or who just don't agree with proponents of the Roe rationale on which side of the privacy/socially relevant behavior line abortion falls on. Add that to the fact that the Roe rationale is not actually the same as Douglas's infamous "penumbras" in Griswold, and it really isn't that difficult to imagine someone concluding in good faith that one of those two cases was correctly decided and the other was not.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The last month has again reenforced my idea that the answer is "maybe". They are already looking to start working on overturning Obergefell or at least creating carve outs for it on "religious liberty". Maybe "religious liberty" is enough of an argument to overturn Obergefell because by forcing the Government to recognize Homosexual Marriage and Queer rights in general, it forces tax payers to aid in abet in things that make it impossible for them to practice their religion. This is the same argument that was used by Hobby Lobby to get out from having to buy insurance for their employees that covered birth control.

The Hobby Lobby argument had to do with whether a for-profit corporation can have a religious character. You really can't make the same set of claims about whether someone's 1040 form can, although someone will probably try to anyway.