The issue is more nuanced than the picture you present. In 1967, the Fourth Amendment was extended to areas in which a person had the "reasonable expectation of

The issue is more nuanced than the picture you present. In 1967, the Fourth Amendment was extended to areas in which a person had the "reasonable expectation of privacy" (Katz v. United States). This is well established precedent which, in the worlds of Justice Scalia, "[Katz] has been around for so long, we're not going to overrule that". In a recent case, United States v. Antoine Jones, both a right leaning justice (Alito) and a left leaning justice (Sotomayor) expressed strong concerns in favor privacy. The above illustrates that the problem is not with privacy, as you seem to think. Thinkers across the ideological spectrum generally believe people have the right to keep things private in many areas of their lives. The question is to what should this right apply and to what extent. Privacy is not doomed just because it is linked to Roe. It has well founded support in a range of cases.