a conservative legal scholar
says that he thinks it most unlikely that a Trump court will overturn Roe or Obergefell outright, preferring to continue the drip drip of small cases that chip away.
That's entirely up to them- they pick the cases they want to take. They can go activist- like grabbing an obscure case to assert the absolute power of money in politics in Citizens United, or choose not to hear anything that might present a challenge to their worldview.
Makes sense to me. The people who fund them don't give two ####s about gay marriage or abortions but they want to keep the sheeple stirred up while they continue to rob the bank and strip away rights.
Don't know if they'll choose to revisit any of Scalia's landmark gun cases and perhaps remove the assertion that the government has the right to do background checks and registry, limit excessive firepower etc.
My guess is probably the latter which I mentioned- they'll just let those cases lie with the lower courts rather than having to craft some ridiculous justification.
a very important Founder but seldom mentioned.
Death feud with his cousin Thomas Jefferson, or perhaps philosophy itself, led to Marbury v. Madison and the establishment of the SCOTUS as an equal leg on the three cornered stool.