> Even Ginsburg admitted that Roe's legal foundation was poorly reasoned.

I don't believe this is true.

I have only ever seen evidence that RBG thought the Roe was procedurally shaky and open to attack. I cannot find anywhere that Ginsburg disagreed with the logic behind Roe, just that she felt it was politically problematic. It doesn't seem that she disagreed that Right to Privacy encapsulates abortion rights, just that basing abortion rights on Gender Equality rather than Right to Privacy would have been stronger footing.

She wrote in her dissent in Gonzales v. Carhart that "legal challenges to undue restrictions on abortion procedures do not seek to vindicate some generalized notion of privacy; rather, they center on a woman's autonomy to determine her life's course, and thus to enjoy equal citizenship stature."

As this article from June explains,

> On the right, Ginsburg has served an entirely different purpose: as a supposed vindicator of what the Supreme Court just did. Plenty have pointed to Ginsburg’s past criticisms of Roe to suggest that even she might have agreed with the present-day Supreme Court that the case was wrongly decided in the first place...

> There’s no question Ginsburg disagreed with how Roe was decided. But it’s hardly that simple.

> Indeed Ginsburg’s criticisms of Roe generally had to do with pragmatic and political concerns, rather than saying it was outright wrong. And far from wanting to leave this decision to the states, as Friday’s decision does, she repeatedly sided with the idea that abortion was a constitutional right. She had preferred that right to be phased in more gradually and that it rely more on a different part of the Constitution — the right to equal protection rather than the right to privacy, the basis of Roe.

In a speech at the NYU School of Law in 1993, Ginsburg said, "The Roe decision might have been less of a storm center had it both homed in more precisely on the women's equality dimension of the issue..."

She also points out how Roe's singularity provided a pariah for anti-choice activists to rally against: "Around that extraordinary decision, a well-organized and vocal right-to-life movement rallied and succeeded, for a considerable time, in turning the legislative tide in the opposite direction." She repeated this sentiment two decades later in a 2013 speech at the University of Chicago Law School: "That was my concern, that the court had given opponents of access to abortion a target to aim at relentlessly."

Anyways, if RBG did say somewhere that she thought Roe was poorly reasoned, I'm all ears. But I have never stumbled upon that. This is what I have come across.