But even the most pro-choice advocates are in favor of regulating and requiring standards of abortion providers and medical centers to the ensure safety of patients.

Nobody is arguing that the bar for providing abortions (particularly surgical options), or for storing medicines and medical supplies, be as low as the current bar for opening a gun shop and storing inventory.

The analogy would be that gun shops should also be subject to rigorous standards to ensure safety, even if that means that fewer shops exist.

I’d agree that “we can legislate away guns by making it impossible to sell them” doesn’t pass muster.

But “stores that sell deadly weapons should be closely monitored and require a reasonable but high standard of care re: sales and inventory storage, even if it presents a burden” is not incompatible with pro-choice arguments.

If that opens the door to legislating them out of states and towns by creating unrealistic expectations solely to overburden existing enterprises, that’s on the right and their judges for opening that door and enshrining it as a precedent. Maybe they shouldn’t have done that.