1) Those protesting SCOTUS say it's "undemocratic" that 9 Justices get to decide the question of abortion. Overturning Roe would throw the issue back to the people to decide - electing people as they see fit (democracy).
2) They didn't have a problem with the original decision where 9 Justices DECIDED the issue, ignoring the public (democratic process).
3) SCOTUS is NOT supposed to be democratic; that's what Congress is for. The Framers didn't intend to create a second democratic institution; the purpose of the courts, and the Bill of Rights, is to protect the minority from the majority. If you're in the majority, you don't need the Bill of Rights; Congress/democracy is on your side. But the majority is always tempted to stick it to the minority. The 1st Amendment protects the Little Sisters of the Poor from having to facilitate abortions.
(P.S.: Why is it "undemocratic for Billionaire Musk to own Twitter, but perfectly acceptable for Billionaire Bezos to own WaPo and billionaire Carlos Slim to own a controlling portion of the NYT? "Undemocratic" now means, "I didn't get to have it my way". These are the one who will put an end to democracy.
Exactly. All the California communists should rejoice that some guy from Rhode Island doesn't have (or it is at least federally recognized that he SHOULDN'T have) the ability and power to sculpt local laws and culture.