Thomas has his head up his ass if he is opposed to the legality and availability of contraceptives.
The SCOTUS only decides the Constitutionality of a law. It isn't supposed to write them.
With that in mind, Thomas and the Court might revisit what level of government should be deciding what constitutes "marriage", what constitutes "obscenity", or 'unacceptable behaviour'.
At one time, those definitions were left to the several States to legislate, and not be forced to abandon the standards held in some states to acquiesce to the lower standards held in others.
This is a return to States' Rights, and the possible end of 'one size fits all' Federal concentration of power. It also forces the groups which now coalesce nationally to lobby every Statehouse and Governor's office to get their way instead of just muck up DC, which means their 'causes' will have to spend a bunch more to show up at that many places, and may be show up as smaller crowds.
Contraceptives, imho, are the single most seminal reason that abortion can be readily restricted (aside from it being murder), because the situation that many say calls for abortion can be avoided by the judicious use of Contraceptives. I do not see anything that prevents becoming pregnant being banned, simply because it removes much of the case for abortion.