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.
24. New York v. Sullivan. U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit Fed Report; 1989 Nov; 889():401-18. PubMed ID: 11648392 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Fischer v. Commonwealth, Dept. of Public Welfare. Pennsylvania. Commonwealth Court Atl Report; 1982 Apr; 444():774-83. PubMed ID: 11648335 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Constitutional law--United States Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of the Hyde Amendment...--Harris v. McRae, 100 S.Ct. 2671 (1980). Barnett BA Temple Law Q; 1981; 54(1):109-44. PubMed ID: 11655628 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. State of Georgia v. Heckler. U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit Fed Report; 1985 Aug; 768():1293-9. PubMed ID: 11648354 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. The Supreme Court on abortion funding: the second time around. Horan DJ; Marzen TJ St Louis Univ Law J; 1981; 25(2):411-27. PubMed ID: 11655812 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Illinois v. United States Department of Health and Human Services. U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit Fed Report; 1985 Aug; 772():329-35. PubMed ID: 11648364 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Hope v. Perales: expanding medically necessary abortion rights of pregnant indigent women under New York and Nebraska state constitutional due process clauses. Brown M Neb Law Rev; 1993; 72(2):586-607. PubMed ID: 11656347 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Doe v. Director of Department of Social Services. Michigan. Court of Appeals Wests North West Rep; 1991 Feb; 468():862-83. PubMed ID: 12041153 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Funding of medically-necessary abortions: a reexamination of U.S. law and a call for EC federalism. Nishi J Univ Chic Leg Forum; 1992; [1992]():517-38. PubMed ID: 11652961 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. The racially disparate impact of restrictions on the public funding of abortion: an analysis of current equal protection doctrine. Baron DR Boston Coll Third World Law J; 1993; 13(1):1-61. PubMed ID: 11656354 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Doe v. Busbee. U.S. District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division Fed Suppl; 1979 Dec; 481():46-50. PubMed ID: 11648343 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. State limitations upon the availability and accessibility of abortions after Wade and Bolton. Finn J Univ Kans Law Rev; 1976; 25(1):87-107. PubMed ID: 11663734 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Abortion laws, religious beliefs and the first amendment. Skahn SL Valparaiso Univ Law Rev; 1980; 14(3):487-526. PubMed ID: 11664174 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. State of Georgia, Dept. of Medical Assistance v. Heckler. U.S. District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division Fed Suppl; 1984 Apr; 583():1377-82. PubMed ID: 11648336 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Survey of abortion law. Platt JG; O'Malley K Ariz State Law J; 1980; 1980(1):67-216. PubMed ID: 11655392 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Doe v. Rose. 27 Jun 1974. U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit Fed Report; 1974; 499():1112-7. PubMed ID: 11645988 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]