“Roe is different because it’s an old case, a so-called “super-precedent.”
Well I’d like to believe that but our newest Associate Justice refused to classify Roe in her listing of “super precedents” such as Brown v. Board of Ed and Marbury v. Madison etc. To be a “super precedent” she argued that the outcome has to be one which is widely accepted, society has come to rely upon it and where there is no longer significant public disagreement. On the latter criteria, she separated out Roe from other cases as one where the Court might still reverse and find that it was “wrongly decided”.