I understand the fear that a conservative court could overturn Roe. But if Roe is codified into law, and the law is challenged in court, that same court could then invalidate the law... because the constitution trumps all laws, and the supreme court decides what's constitutional.

The only thing that would stand more strongly in the way of a conservative court being able to overturn Roe would be a constitutional amendment, not a law. That's what would make it unambiguously constitutional and that's what the court would look at. "Laws" in no way constrain the court's decisions... in fact, their role is essentially to decide which ones stand. So I don't see the point of this at all.

It would put the Supreme Court in a difficult position. Would they want to overturn a very high profile federal law? It seems like it would further strengthen the original Roe ruling, and that's the way it should be written.

An amendment would obviously be better, but a federal law would be second best

The problem I see with it is if it wouldn't pass, then that would make Roe look more weak. They'd have to be absolutely certain they had the votes before trying it.

They should just win in 2020 and replace Thomas, Ginsburg, and Breyer. Problem solved.