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.
585 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11656224)
1. The impact of public abortion funding decisions on indigent women: a proposal to reform state statutory and constitutional abortion funding provisions. Corns CA Univ Mich J Law Reform; 1991; 24(2):371-403. PubMed ID: 11656224 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Committee to Defend Reproductive Rights v. Myers: Medi-Cal funding of abortion. Hendrickson E Gold Gate Univ Law Rev; 1978; 9(2):361-419. PubMed ID: 11664072 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The right to Medicaid payment for abortion. Butler PA Hastings Law J; 1977 Mar; 28(4):931-77. PubMed ID: 11663756 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The abortion-funding issue: a study in mixed constitutional cues. Yarbrough TE North Carol Law Rev; 1981 Mar; 59(3):611-27. PubMed ID: 11655747 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Government funding in Title X projects: circumscribing the constitutional rights of the indigent: Rust v. Sullivan. Maher L Calif West Law Rev; 1992; 29(1):143-82. PubMed ID: 11656260 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Committee to Defend Reproductive Rights v. Myers: abortion funding restrictions as an unconstitutional condition. Sherman CW Calif Law Rev; 1982 Jul; 70(4):978-1013. PubMed ID: 11655731 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. The effect of recent Medicaid decisions on a constitutional right: abortions only for the rich? Lalli MA Fordham Urban Law J; 1978; 6(3):687-710. PubMed ID: 11663905 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. National health care legislation and the funding of abortion. Mahoney HM America (NY); 1993 Oct; 169(11):8-9. PubMed ID: 11659793 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. Committee to Defend Reproductive Rights v. Myers: procreative choice guaranteed for all women. Erca A Gold Gate Univ Law Rev; 1982; 12(3):691-716. PubMed ID: 11655619 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Autonomy's magic wand: abortion and constitutional interpretation. Allen AL Boston Univ Law Rev; 1992 Sep; 72(4):683-98. PubMed ID: 11656223 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Abortion compromise -- inevitable and impossible. Law SA Univ Ill Law Rev; 1992; 25(4):921-41. PubMed ID: 11656296 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Losing the negative right of privacy: building sexual and reproductive freedom. Copelon R Rev Law Soc Change; 1990-1991; 18(1):15-50. PubMed ID: 11656169 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]