Even if true, I think that really won't have a lot of practical significance. This kind of thing isn't completely without precedent. Norma McCorvey, the Roe in the Roe v. Wade decision, was quite unreliable (if we are being charitable). She had probably fabricated important parts of her story.

These are from Wikipedia [1]:

> McCorvey stated then that her involvement in Roe was "the biggest mistake of [her] life".[4] However, in the Nick Sweeney documentary AKA Jane Roe, McCorvey said, in what she called her "deathbed confession", that "she never really supported the anti-abortion movement" and that she had been paid for her anti-abortion sentiments

> In 1969, at the age of 21, McCorvey became pregnant a third time and returned to Dallas. According to McCorvey, friends advised her that she should assert falsely that she had been raped by a group of black men and that she could thereby obtain a legal abortion under Texas's law, which prohibited most abortion; sources differ over whether Texas law had such a rape exception. Due to a lack of police evidence or documentation, the scheme was not successful, and McCorvey later said it was a fabrication.

> In 1983, McCorvey told the press that she had been raped; in 1987, she said the rape claim was untrue.

If we think the institutions and procedures which lead to the Roe v. Wade decision (or say a lot of other rulings by the the Warren and Burger Courts) were legitimate, the situation is quite similar now, mutatis mutandis.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Norma_McCorvey&ol...