Imagine, if you will, that you are a US citizen who is firmly planted in one camp or the other; pro-choice or pro-life. Now imagine that "orange man bad" and/or SCOTUS have decided to maintain control over this issue and the side they have chosen is not the side you are on. Imagine yourself pregnant and desiring termination of "the pregnancy". Provided you have also determined yourself to be a law-abiding citizen, likewise determined to have a legal abortion, what now is your only option? Right. Leave the country for the procedure and perhaps permanently. If, as it has been done, it was a state's rights issue, you would possibly have 49 other states you could move to, well realistically, probably 15 or 16...without having to give up your citizenship and the enjoyment of the freedom of speech that affords you the right to continue to campaign for your viewpoint perhaps leading to your desired state changing it's stance on the issue. In this case, the former President and SCOTUS actually just did you a
huge favor. I, myself, have lived in 4 different states and remain where I am currently because the state's laws on many issues are conducive to how I prefer to live.
My particular view on abortion is irrelevant, as is the former President's and SCOTUS' now that it is a state issue. The abortion issue is not and will never reach unanimous agreement. So, leaving it a one (federal) decision for all is a massive gamble for everyone. If the President did decide this issue, it would go one way or the other and maybe not the way you want it to. You used the word "autocrat" and yet you want him
to be an autocrat in this particular instance. That is nonsensical. And again, if we use that term "democracy", well...there is far more room for that if the residents of any given state choose their state representatives who will represent them where they live.
I am going to have to toss out your pairing the abortion issue to the segregation issue (because there is no such issue). The voices that may be making noise for a return to segregation are miniscule, as in the extreme minority. It is a non sequitur. There is no parity, not even in towns/states where you would think (due to false media claims) such claims would have credibility.
Now that...was masterful comic relief.

My wife even asked me why I was laughing. But, you are starting to sound like someone who does not have demonstrable facts and thus resorts to name calling. This is why the Harris/Walz campaign is failing. People (only some) forget, the former President...was already the President. He got us into no new wars and stood toe to toe with any other leader of any other country. The economy was far better (ie. cost of living, cost of fuel, cost of food, employment, etc.). He sent more money to HBCU's (Historically Black Colleges and Universities) than any president before him. Our border was neither overrun by illegal immigrants nor fentanyl and other drugs. His policies were working. His track record is impressive no matter which previous president you stand him next to. Yes, if that's an "asshole" I am voting for the "asshole".

Biden could barely walk and talk (no exaggeration) and got booted from the ticket by his own party and Harris/Walz have no policies (that the former president did not come up with first) and only that same kind of blind vitriol that you seem to be echoing so eloquently. America cannot be successfully run on lies, back-peddling and anger. There must be strength and substance; cult of personality is a distant third. I do not care about mean tweets, offending people with facts or an inability to placate the mentally unstable who feel like identifying as a duck, today. No. the President needs to
run the country and run it well.
I am not trying to insult you; however, I do think you owe it to yourself to, perhaps, educate yourself a little bit more on these issues (aside from the mainstream media agenda/talking points). Delve deeper.