It's honestly pretty funny that Atlas is dreaming of some random future where atheistic (or Christian-In-Name-Only) norms are the only ones present in politics, while in the real world, Roe vs. Wade is set to die as soon as Ginsburg leaves SCOTUS.
You do remember that Kennedy was the author of the Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision, don't you?
So? Replace Scalia and Ginsburg with pro-lifers, and that plus Roberts, Alito, Thomas is 5 votes against Roe. Kennedy's vote doesn't matter.
You really think that Roberts would seek to overturn Roe on a slender 5-4 ruling? Roberts is conservative, not reactionary. As would be the case with any established precedent, he's going to need something firmer than "I think abortion is bad" to overturn Roe completely. The most Roberts would do is give cover to those who seek to indirectly ban abortion by overregulating it to death.
As for Alito, I'll grant that it was back when he was an appellate court judge, but he joined in a decision (
Planned Parenthood of Central N.J. v. Farmer (3d Circuit 2000)) finding New Jersey's Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 1997 to be unconstitutional. So I think he too is going to be in the camp of needing something more than just "abortion is bad" to overturn
Roe.
Were
Roe not already part of the law of the land, both justices certainly would not vote to find a previously undiscovered right to an abortion, but it is part of the law of the land and while both will likely vote to uphold restrictions, that's not the same as overturning.
