These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11646051)
1. Doe v. Zimmerman. 3 Dec 1975. U.S. District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania Fed Suppl; 1975; 405():534-41. PubMed ID: 11646051 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Planned Parenthood Association v. Fitzpatrick. 4 Sep 1975. U.S. District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania Fed Suppl; 1975; 401():554-94. PubMed ID: 11646052 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth. 31 Jan 1975. U.S. District Court, E.D. Missouri, E.D Fed Suppl; 1975; 392():1362-79. PubMed ID: 11646047 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey: the reaffirmation of Roe or the beginning of the end? Henry KS Univ Louisv J Fam Law; 1993-1994 Winter; 32(1):93-113. PubMed ID: 11660011 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Planned Parenthood Association of Kansas City v. Ashcroft. U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit Fed Report; 1981 Jul; 655():848-78. PubMed ID: 11648459 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. S.J. Res. 110: Human Life Federalism Amendment. Hatch OG Congr Rec (Dly Ed); 1981 Sep; 127(131):S10194-8. PubMed ID: 11658572 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Roe to Casey: a survey of abortion law. Pirner RK; Williams LB Washburn Law J; 1993; 32(2):166-89. PubMed ID: 11659798 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. A decade of cementing the mosaic of Roe v. Wade: is the composite a message to leave abortion alone? Kudner KE Univ Toledo Law Rev; 1984; 15(2):681-753. PubMed ID: 11649780 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Planned Parenthood v. Casey: the current state of abortion law. Berlin SI Second Opin; 1993 Jan; 18(3):104-9. PubMed ID: 11645221 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. High Court, 5-4, affirms right to abortion but allows most of Pennsylvania's limits. Greenhouse L N Y Times Web; 1992 Jun; ():A1, A15-17. PubMed ID: 11647923 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth. 1 Jul 1976. U.S. Supreme Court U S Rep U S Supreme Court; 1976; 428():52-105. PubMed ID: 12038364 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Enforcement of state abortion statutes after Roe: a state-by-state analysis. Linton PB Univ Detroit Law Rev; 1990; 67(2):157-259. PubMed ID: 11659261 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Coe v. Gerstein. 17 Apr 1974. U.S. District Court, S.D. Florida Fed Suppl; 1974; 376():695-9. PubMed ID: 11645991 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Planned Parenthood Association of Kansas City v. Ashcroft. U.S. Supreme Court U S Rep U S Supreme Court; 1983 Jun; 462():476-505. PubMed ID: 12041276 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Constitutional law--abortion--parental and spousal consent requirements--right to privacy. Long SL; Ravenscraft P Akron Law Rev; 1976; 10(2):367-82. PubMed ID: 11664733 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Perspectives on the abortion decision. Noble CF N M Law Rev; 1978 Winter 1978; 9(1):175-86. PubMed ID: 11665182 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Demise of the trimester standard? City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Inc. Curry RE J Fam Law; 1984-1985; 23(2):267-86. PubMed ID: 11651847 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Privacy II: state attempts to regulate abortion. Prall S Annu Surv Am Law; 1988; 1(2):385-427. PubMed ID: 11652657 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. American College of Obstetricians v. Thornburgh. U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit Fed Report; 1984 May; 737():283-319. PubMed ID: 11648491 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]