Ironically, religion could be the answer for challenging the overturning of Roe v Wade.

Even the Catholic Church permits termination when neither the mother nor the baby can possibly survive to term. Ectopic pregnancy, for example.
Abortion by choice I'm opposed to, largely because it's usually due to laziness. Contraception isn't hard. Termination for medical reasons is a horse of an entirely different colour - and imo the mother's life takes precedence over the infant's. Case in point, a pregnant Catholic woman was diagnosed with a particularly aggressive cancer needing immediate treatment, and there was no way the foetus could survive the procedure. The Church demanded that she carry the child to term first - by which time, the cancer had advanced too far for anything to stop it. The baby and her two older siblings were left without a mother.

Which state do you think does not allow exceptions for the life of the Mother?

I’m not a lawyer, obviously, but if Roe vs. Wade gets overturned, then abortion automatically becomes regulated by the individual states or territories.

Of the states and territories where more restrictions on abortion will happen if Roe vs. Wade gets overturned, all of them already have exceptions for the life or health of the mother in their laws.  If that’s the case, then no one would ever have standing to bring a lawsuit on those grounds, so it’s kind of a moot point.

In some Satanic groups, abortion is a sacrament, so I guess it’s possible a First Amendment case could be made there.  If there’s a Satanic group that practices ritual abortions in a place where it’s against the law, then I think they’d have standing to bring such a lawsuit.

That would, of course, start an argument over just how absolute the freedom of religion really is.  Maybe there’s a lawyer here on AM who can actually tell me how right or wrong I am about this.