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.
282 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16001469)
21. Family law I: abortion. Koscs ME Annu Surv Am Law; 1984; 2():929-60. PubMed ID: 16086473 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Inverting the viability test for abortion law. Ching B Womens Rights Law Report; 2000; 22(1):37-45. PubMed ID: 16281341 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. The Supreme Court and abortion: 1. Upholding constitutional principles. Noonan JT Hastings Cent Rep; 1980 Dec; 10(6):14-6. PubMed ID: 7461954 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Abrogating stare decisis by statute: may Congress remove the precedential effect of Roe and Casey? Paulsen MS Yale Law J; 2001; 109(7):1535-602. PubMed ID: 16281343 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. After Ayotte: the need to defend abortion rights with renewed "purpose.". Harv Law Rev; 2006 Jun; 119(8):2552-73. PubMed ID: 16827220 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. USA and abortion. Noonan JT Tablet; 1976 May; 230(7079):494-6. PubMed ID: 11662284 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Abortion politics and health insurance reform. Annas GJ N Engl J Med; 2009 Dec; 361(27):2589-91. PubMed ID: 19955513 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. In new court, Roe may stand, so foes look to limit its scope. Toner R; Liptak A N Y Times Web; 2005 Jul; ():A1, A16. PubMed ID: 16060018 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Consti-tortion: tort law as an end-run around abortion rights after Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Stone AJ Am Univ J Gend Soc Policy Law; 2000; 8(2):471-515. PubMed ID: 16594110 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Abortion legislation after Webster v. Reproductive Health Services: model statutes and commentaries. Smolin DM Cumberland Law Rev; 1989-1990; 20(1):71-163. PubMed ID: 15999438 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The constitutional right to therapeutic cloning. Bellinger M J Med Law; 2002; 7(1):37-53. PubMed ID: 17256230 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Abortion: should Constitution be amended? Loomis D Congr Q Wkly Rep; 1975 May; 33(18):917-22. PubMed ID: 11663606 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Rust v. Sullivan: a better debate. America (NY); 1991 Jun; 164(22):611. PubMed ID: 15991418 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Minor rights: the adolescent abortion cases. Guggenheim M Hofstra Law Rev; 2002; 30(3):589-646. PubMed ID: 15212070 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Evolving State-Based Contraceptive and Abortion Policies. Mallampati D; Simon MA; Janiak E JAMA; 2017 Jun; 317(24):2481-2482. PubMed ID: 28558101 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Legal failure or moral success? An evaluation of the ban on partial-birth abortion. Kolenc AB America (NY); 2004 Nov; 191(17):11-4. PubMed ID: 15675070 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Winter count: taking stock of abortion rights after Casey and Carhart. Borgmann CE Fordham Urban Law J; 2004 Mar; 31(3):675-716. PubMed ID: 16700116 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. The Supreme Court and abortion: the irrelevance of medical judgment. Annas GJ Hastings Cent Rep; 1980 Oct; 10(5):23-4. PubMed ID: 7002867 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Assessing the viability of a substantive due process right to in vitro fertilization. Harv Law Rev; 2005 Jun; 118(8):2792-813. PubMed ID: 15988862 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Parental notification and a minor's right to an abortion after Hodgson and Akron II. Graziano SG Ohio North Univ Law Rev; 1991; 17(3):581-97. PubMed ID: 16145809 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]