232 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10123589)
1. State abortion statutes on the eve of the Supreme Court's decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.
Terwilliger LM
J Health Hosp Law; 1992 Jun; 25(6):161-74. PubMed ID: 10123589
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Comment: United States Supreme Court upholds right to abortion subject to increased state regulation. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.
Cerny RA
J Health Hosp Law; 1992 Jul; 25(7):212-5. PubMed ID: 10183821
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The Supreme Court, liberty, and abortion.
Annas GJ
N Engl J Med; 1992 Aug; 327(9):651-4. PubMed ID: 1640971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Casey and the resuscitation of Roe v. Wade.
Robertson JA
Hastings Cent Rep; 1992; 22(5):24-8. PubMed ID: 1428831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The role of women in abortion jurisprudence: from Roe to Casey and beyond.
Martin PA
Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 1993; 2(3):309-19. PubMed ID: 8293219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The Casey undue burden standard: problems predicted and encountered, and the split over the Salerno test.
Burdick R
Hastings Constit Law Q; 1996; 23():825-76. PubMed ID: 16086482
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Abortion on the Supreme Court agenda: Planned Parenthood v. Casey and its possible consequences.
Koslov TI
Law Med Health Care; 1992; 20(3):243-8. PubMed ID: 1434769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Rust corrodes: the First Amendment implications of Rust v. Sullivan.
Fitzpatrick M
Stanford Law Rev; 1992 Nov; 45(1):185-227. PubMed ID: 10183813
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Eroding access to reproductive services.
Lado ME
Health PAC Bull; 1992; 22(2):6-7. PubMed ID: 10183723
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Winter count: taking stock of abortion rights after Casey and Carhart.
Borgmann CE
Fordham Urban Law J; 2004 Mar; 31(3):675-716. PubMed ID: 16700116
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Abortion, precedent, and the Constitution: a comment on Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.
Maltz EM
Notre Dame Law Rev; 1992; 68(1):11-32. PubMed ID: 11656531
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Abortion providers bounce back.
Carney EN
Natl J (Wash); 1996 Jul; 28(29-30):1584-6. PubMed ID: 10159048
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Webster versus reproductive health services.
Rhodes AM
MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs; 1989; 14(6):423. PubMed ID: 2514333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The summer of our discontent.
O'Connor J
Hastings Cent Rep; 1992; 22(5):28-9. PubMed ID: 1428832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Pro-choice: a new militancy.
Davis SE
Hastings Cent Rep; 1989; 19(6):32-3. PubMed ID: 2606658
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. From arguments to Supreme Court opinions in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Kassop N
PS (Wash DC); 1993 Mar; 26(1):53-8. PubMed ID: 12085874
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey: constitutional principles and political turbulence.
Bigel AI
Univ Dayton Law Rev; 1993; 18(3):733-62. PubMed ID: 11659777
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. A relational approach to moral decision-making: the majority opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Sullivan PA; Goldzwig SR
Q J Speech; 1995 May; 81(2):167-90. PubMed ID: 11808622
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Abortion legislation after Webster v. Reproductive Health Services: model statutes and commentaries.
Smolin DM
Cumberland Law Rev; 1989-1990; 20(1):71-163. PubMed ID: 15999438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Four-one-four.
Annas GJ
Hastings Cent Rep; 1989; 19(5):27-9. PubMed ID: 2793440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
