I believe that. I think the vast majority of the United States believe that too.... the problem is that the argument wasn't framed that way. It was how Ginsberg wanted it framed, and I think it's how it should be framed.

However, it's not cut and dry. Whilst liberals have a tendency to see abortion rights as underpinning female equality, there are plenty of females on the other side of the fence who disagree. Amy Coney-Barrett is likely to be one of them. They argue things like adoption are a better alternative.... and in a democracy those people must make their arguments too.

Then I think centre ground republican moderates get elected at the state level to temper the most restrictive laws - and new legislation is brought under a different amendment. When you begin with the assumption that women are equal to men (as Ginsberg did in the Struck case) then I think you will end up with abortion rights and they won't be so easily overturned.