217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11658353)
1. Sex selection abortion: a constitutional analysis of the abortion liberty and a person's right to know.
Schaibley JR
Indiana Law J; 1981; 56(2):281-319. PubMed ID: 11658353
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. A thorn in the side of privacy: the need for reassessment of the constitutional right to abortion.
Kunz KA
Marquette Law Rev; 1987; 70(3):534-71. PubMed ID: 11655884
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. Abortion and the consideration of fundamental, irreconcilable interests.
Jones CJ
Syracuse Law Rev; 1982; 33(2):565-613. PubMed ID: 11658668
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Woman, womb, and bodily integrity.
Neff CL
Yale J Law Fem; 1991; 3(2):327-53. PubMed ID: 11656226
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. The Supreme Court, the "facts of life" and "the thoughtful part of the nation.
Destro RA
Hum Life Rev; 1994; 20(3):28-48. PubMed ID: 11656359
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The Title X family planning gag rule: can the government buy up constitutional rights?
Chervin CI
Stanford Law Rev; 1989 Jan; 41(2):401-34. PubMed ID: 11655926
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Emancipation as freedom in Roe v. Wade.
Bezanson RP
Dickinson Law Rev; 1993; 97(3):485-512. PubMed ID: 11656343
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Unenumerated rights: whether and how Roe should be overruled.
Dworkin R
Univ Chic Law Rev; 1992; 59(1):381-432. PubMed ID: 11656301
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. How rights are infringed: the role of undue burden analysis in constitutional doctrine.
Brownstein A
Hastings Law J; 1994 Apr; 45(4):867-959. PubMed ID: 11656422
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Abortion rights in America.
Bullock JR
Brigh Young Univ Law Rev; 1994; 1994(1):63-94. PubMed ID: 11656488
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Reproduction and the law.
Erickson NS
Med Trial Tech Q; 1985; 32(2):165-74. PubMed ID: 11649200
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The Webster amicus curiae briefs: perspectives on the abortion controversy and the role of the Supreme Court -- amici for appellees.
Annas GJ
Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):169-203. PubMed ID: 11644396
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Where privacy fails: equal protection and the abortion rights of minors.
Schmidt CG
N Y Univ Law Rev; 1993 Jun; 68(3):597-638. PubMed ID: 11659822
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Abortion and section 7 of the Charter: proposing a constitutionally valid foetal protection law.
McCourt KM; Love DJ
Manit Law J; 1989; 18(3):365-94. PubMed ID: 11656021
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
