The original "Roe Effect" most frequently argued by James Taranto, is that Roe V. Wades reduces the ranks of the pro abortion camp by aborting would-be members. An interesting if debatable concept. This thesis is quiet different; it argues that overturning the landmark 1973 rulling would have little effect on the number of abortions in America. I've argued the same for years. It seems unlikely states where abortion was legal before 1973 would suddenly ban it. And in states where laws against abortion are on the books but also on ice because of Roe would suddenly see a very different landscape.
After 40 years of legal abortion it would be banned in those states. You have to believe there would be moves in those state's to legalize it. But I think this piece, while I agree with it, really misses the point. Roe is horrible case law. It creates a right to privacy in the Constiution out of thin air. Whatever it's impact on the number of abortions, it should be overturned as abysmal jurisprudence.