He may be referring to the fact that Roe v Wade was an opinion written about Privacy. In short, the SCOTUS said that a state was infringing on a citizen's right to medical privacy and their right to avoid future distress if the state outright denied the ability to choose whether they had a child or not.

I'm not sure I agree that it would be an immediate threat via the jab, but stupider rulings have come from this court recently. With medical privacy, mootness, future distress, and citizens rights all mixed into this case, the SCOTUS would have a lot of room to make a lot of problems.