BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

311 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16437786)

  • 1. X marks the spot while Casey strikes out: two controversial abortion decisions.
    Zenkich S
    Gold Gate Univ Law Rev; 1993; 23(3):1001-40. PubMed ID: 16437786
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Abortion, precedent, and the Constitution: a comment on Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.
    Maltz EM
    Notre Dame Law Rev; 1992; 68(1):11-32. PubMed ID: 11656531
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The right of privacy and restraints on abortion under the "undue burden" test: a jurisprudential comparison of Planned Parenthood v. Casey with European practice and Italian law.
    Ross CS
    Indiana Int Comp Law Rev; 1993; 3():199-231. PubMed ID: 12091926
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Abortion rights after South Dakota.
    McDonagh E
    Free Inq; 2006; 26(4):34-8. PubMed ID: 16830439
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. What happens if Roe is overruled? Extraterritorial regulation of abortion by the states.
    Bradford CS
    Ariz Law Rev; 1993; 35(1):87-171. PubMed ID: 12645556
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Why the government is not required to subsidize abortion counseling and referral.
    Hirt TC
    Harv Law Rev; 1988 Jun; 101():1895-915. PubMed ID: 11655923
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. From arguments to Supreme Court opinions in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
    Kassop N
    PS (Wash DC); 1993 Mar; 26(1):53-8. PubMed ID: 12085874
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Review of abortion policy: legality, medicaid funding, and parental involvement, 1967-1994.
    Merz JF; Jackson CA; Klerman JA
    Womens Rights Law Report; 1995; 17(1):1-61. PubMed ID: 11863033
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. The Court and abortion: worse than you think.
    Dworkin R
    New York Rev Books; 2007 May; 54(9):20-1. PubMed ID: 17517997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Abortion 1990s: contemporary issues and the activist court.
    Bertz RC
    West State Univ Law Rev; 1992; 19(2):393-429. PubMed ID: 16047452
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Partial-truth abortion bans.
    Kaminer W
    Free Inq; 2006; 26(4):17-8. PubMed ID: 16830438
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Air Force women's access to abortion services and the erosion of 10 U.S.C., section 1093.
    Wilde ML
    William Mary J Women Law; 2003; 9(3):351-412. PubMed ID: 15977327
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Abortion and birth control--right to abortion and regulation thereof: the United States Supreme Court invalidates a statute banning partial birth abortions: Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000).
    Joersz M
    N D Law Rev; 2001; 77(2):345-73. PubMed ID: 12956123
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. So-called "partial birth abortion" bans: bad medicine? Maybe. Bad law? Definitely!
    Massie AM
    Univ Pittsbg Law Rev; 1998; 59(2):301-80. PubMed ID: 11902179
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. New York v. Sullivan: shhh ... don't say the "a" word! Another outcome-oriented abortion decision.
    Kendall CC
    John Marshall Law Rev; 1990; 23(4):753-70. PubMed ID: 16622962
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.