They believe that the policies they support and the laws they enact will not adversely affect their own.
Some of the election suppression laws that have been enacted will affect Republicans. Disabled, perhaps. Or living in rural areas with no access to mail-in ballots. Etc.
I don't know if any studies have been done on the political affiliation of women who have had abortions. Whatever the percentage of Republican women to total voting women is, you would think that something approaching that percentage would be women seeking abortions. Sure, many (most?) might pay lip service to being opposed to abortion. A portion of what might be described as mainstream Republicans (if there is such a thing anymore) might seek abortions, etc., etc. They, too, will be adversely affected by a ban.
As for throwing the burden back on states, if this opinion is what is ultimately released, it will be interesting to see population shifts. Sure, the poor are likely to be unable to pick up stakes and move north or west or whatever. But I would think that many will move. It is also possible that southern colleges and universities will see declines in applications, and, just maybe, companies will find it more of a challenge to entice women or families to move to anti-abortion states.
US businesses are, of course, fickle, and they are unlikely to shift major operations out of anti-abortion states. But some might, just might, take these states out of the equation when they consider expansion or relocation.
And then there's the impact on the 2022 and 2024 elections. After all, if any issue is going to motivate voters to go to the polls, even if only for this one issue, this is it. Sure, the RW extremists might do the same, but these voters might be more complacent given that they will have accomplished, or thought they accomplished, what they've been after for 50 years.
= new reply since forum marked as read
