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.
230 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1428831)
1. Casey and the resuscitation of Roe v. Wade. Robertson JA Hastings Cent Rep; 1992; 22(5):24-8. PubMed ID: 1428831 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The role of women in abortion jurisprudence: from Roe to Casey and beyond. Martin PA Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 1993; 2(3):309-19. PubMed ID: 8293219 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Beyond Roe, after Casey: the present and future of a "fundamental" right. Benshoof J Womens Health Issues; 1993; 3(3):162-70. PubMed ID: 8274872 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Fetal viability as a threshold to personhood. A legal analysis. Peterfy A J Leg Med; 1995 Dec; 16(4):607-36. PubMed ID: 8568420 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The Supreme Court, liberty, and abortion. Annas GJ N Engl J Med; 1992 Aug; 327(9):651-4. PubMed ID: 1640971 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Abortion on the Supreme Court agenda: Planned Parenthood v. Casey and its possible consequences. Koslov TI Law Med Health Care; 1992; 20(3):243-8. PubMed ID: 1434769 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Brief for 885 law professors in support of maintaining adherence to the Roe decision. Michelman FI; Redlich N; Neuwirth SR; Carty-Bennia D Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):197-203. PubMed ID: 2603862 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Abortion: rights or technicalities? A comparison of Roe v. Wade with the abortion decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court. Brown HO Hum Life Rev; 1975; 1(3):60-74. PubMed ID: 11662181 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Constitutionalizing Roe, Casey and Carhart: a legislative due-process anti-discrimination principle that gives constitutional content to the "undue burden" standard of review applied to abortion control legislation. Van Detta JA South Calif Rev Law Womens Stud; 2001; 10(2):211-92. PubMed ID: 16485363 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Planned Parenthood v. Casey: the flight from reason in the Supreme Court. Linton PB St Louis Univ Public Law Rev; 1993; 13(1):15-137. PubMed ID: 11656611 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Partial-birth abortion, Congress, and the Constitution. Annas GJ N Engl J Med; 1998 Jul; 339(4):279-83. PubMed ID: 9673308 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A world without Roe: how different would it be? Glendon MA Hastings Cent Rep; 1989; 19(4):30-1. PubMed ID: 2745061 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Bare court majority reaffirms Roe, but standard for reviewing state laws is relaxed. Wash Memo Alan Guttmacher Inst; 1992 Jul; (11):1-3. PubMed ID: 12286280 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The summer of our discontent. O'Connor J Hastings Cent Rep; 1992; 22(5):28-9. PubMed ID: 1428832 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. State abortion statutes on the eve of the Supreme Court's decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. Terwilliger LM J Health Hosp Law; 1992 Jun; 25(6):161-74. PubMed ID: 10123589 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]