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.
214 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11663589)
21. The legal status of the unborn after Webster. Parness JA Dickinson Law Rev; 1990; 95(1):1-22. PubMed ID: 11659394 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Can Congress create people? Buckley WF; Galebach SH; Bork R; Pilpel H Hum Life Rev; 1981; 7(3):87-108. PubMed ID: 11655601 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. The abortion debate after Webster: the Catholic-American moment. Maestri WF Linacre Q; 1990 Feb; 57(1):46-57. PubMed ID: 11651980 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. The Constitution and abortion. Campbell A Mod Law Rev; 1990 Mar; 53(2):238-48. PubMed ID: 11656038 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. 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]
26. Death of an unborn child: jurisprudential inconsistencies in wrongful death, criminal homicide, and abortion cases. Klasing MS Pepperdine Law Rev; 1995; 22(3):933-79. PubMed ID: 11660413 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Nor piety nor wit: the Supreme Court on abortion. Dellapenna JW Columbia Human Rights Law Rev; 1974 Fall-1975 Winter; 6(2):379-413. PubMed ID: 11663599 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. On the legal status of the proposition that "life begins at conception. Rubenfeld J Stanford Law Rev; 1991 Feb; 43(3):599-635. PubMed ID: 11645689 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Protecting the unborn. Ramsey P Commonweal; 1974 May; 100(13):308-14. PubMed ID: 11663442 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Brain birth: a proposal for defining when a fetus is entitled to human life status. Gertler GB South Calif Law Rev; 1986 Jul; 59(5):1061-78. PubMed ID: 11655850 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Technological advances and Roe v. Wade: the need to rethink abortion law. Martyn K UCLA Law Rev; 1982; 29(5-6):1194-215. PubMed ID: 11655743 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. Abortion and the right of privacy. Ortega ML Philipp Law J; 1973; 48(4-5):652-95. PubMed ID: 11663743 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Viability, values, and the vast cosmos. Horan DJ Cathol Lawyer; 1976; 22(1):1-37. PubMed ID: 11663710 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Overruling Roe v. Wade: an analysis of the proposed Constitutional amendments. Rice CE Boston Coll Ind Commer Law Rev; 1973 Dec; 15(2):307-41. PubMed ID: 11663416 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Abortion choice and the law in Vermont: a recent study. Olmstead FH Vt Law Rev; 1982; 7(2):281-313. PubMed ID: 11655820 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. State regulation of late abortion and the physician's duty of care to the viable fetus. Wood MA; Hawkins LB Miss Law Rev; 1980; 45(3):394-422. PubMed ID: 11664113 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Why a constitutional amendment? Noonan JT Hum Life Rev; 1975; 1(1):26-43. PubMed ID: 11663540 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton: the compelling state interest test in substantive due process. Gelinas A Wash Lee Law Rev; 1973; 30(3):628-46. PubMed ID: 11663508 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]