Sodium sesquicarbonate is NOT a drop-in substitute for borax in photographic developers.
Sesquicarbonate should work as an activator, but since it essentially forms a equimolar carbonate-bicarbonate buffer, the pH (on its own, without other acids or bases present) will be around 9.95. A typical borax buffer will be around 8.5 and e.g. in XTOL it's set to 8.2. This means if you were to substitute sodium sesquicarbonate for borax in a developer, you will most likely end up with a vastly more active developer. This means your film will come out overcooked, you have to re-determine correct development times and the end result may be different (e.g. grainier) as you're essentially working with a different developer than intended.
A carbonate/bicarbonate buffer cannot be set to the pH range for which borax is typically used since the entire useful buffer range of carbonate/bicarbonate is above the upper useful limit of the borate/boric acid buffer range.
Borax continues to be sold as it's a generic chemical; the main restrictions we're currently seeing is it being replaced by alternatives in household applications for fear of the health implications associated with borax (which are debatable, btw). Any retailer specializing in chemistry, especially photochemistry, will be able to sell it. AFAIK there is no legislation in place or in preparation that bars consumers from purchasing borax. The replacement of borax seems to be aimed mostly at limiting/preventing non-intentional exposure by the unassuming public.