391 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11655792)
1. Rethinking Roe v. Wade.
Wardle LD
Brigh Young Univ Law Rev; 1985; 1985(2):231-64. PubMed ID: 11655792
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Testimony opposing "Freedom of Choice Act.
Alvare H;
Origins; 1992 Apr; 21(43):692-6. PubMed ID: 11656134
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Revisiting Roe v. Wade: substance and process in the abortion debate.
Farrell MG
Indiana Law J; 1993; 68(2):269-362. PubMed ID: 11656341
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Rationalizing the abortion debate: legal rhetoric and the abortion controversy.
Chemerinsky E
Buffalo Law Rev; 1982; 31(1):107-64. PubMed ID: 11655711
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Roe v. Wade and the traditional legal standards concerning pregnancy.
Hopkin WR
Temple Law Q; 1974; 47(4):715-38. PubMed ID: 11664349
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. A decision-theoretic reconstruction of Roe v. Wade.
Lockhart T
Public Aff Q; 1991 Jul; 5(3):243-58. PubMed ID: 11656064
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. The Human Life Federalism Amendment: an assessment.
Caron WR
Cathol Lawyer; 1982; 27(2):87-111. PubMed ID: 11655614
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Abortion, absolutism, and compromise.
Carter SL
Yale Law J; 1991 Jun; 100(8):2747-66. PubMed ID: 11656152
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Prenatal caretaking: limits of state intervention with and without Roe.
Rush SE
Univ Fla Law Rev; 1987; 39(1):55-112. PubMed ID: 11658954
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The forest and the trees: Roe v. Wade and its critics.
Heymann PB; Barzelay DE
Boston Univ Law Rev; 1973 Jul; 53(4):765-84. PubMed ID: 11663362
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The invalidity of Canada's abortion law--section 251 of the Criminal Code.
Picher PC
Crim Rep Can New Ser; 1974; 24():1-31. PubMed ID: 11663529
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Living with Roe v. Wade.
McConnell ML
Commentary; 1990 Nov; 90(5):34-8. PubMed ID: 11656047
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. The Webster amicus curiae briefs: perspectives on the abortion controversy and the role of the Supreme Court -- amici for appellants.
Blaustein AP
Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):204-33. PubMed ID: 11644397
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Why Roe v. Wade should be overruled.
Loewy AH
North Carol Law Rev; 1989 Apr; 67(4):939-48. PubMed ID: 11655982
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The new pro-life legislation: patterns and recommendations.
Witherspoon JP
St Marys Law J; 1976; 7(4):637-97. PubMed ID: 11664635
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. The constitutional morality of abortion.
Brownstein A; Dau P
Boston Coll Law Rev; 1992 Jul; 33(4):689-761. PubMed ID: 11656217
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Amendment No. 336.
Bartlett DF
Congr Rec (Dly Ed); 1975 Apr; 121(55):S5708-30. PubMed ID: 11663619
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
