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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

228 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16479703)

  • 21. North Florida Women's Health Services v. State.
    Florida. Supreme Court
    Wests South Report; 2003; 866():612-74. PubMed ID: 16479690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.
    U.S. Supreme Court
    Wests Supreme Court Report; 1992 Jun; 112():2791-885. PubMed ID: 12041291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. The concept of wrongful life in the law.
    Kasper AS
    Women Health; 1983; 8(1):81-7. PubMed ID: 6868627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Stenberg v Carhart: a divided US Supreme Court debates partial birth abortion.
    Heffernan L
    Mod Law Rev; 2001 Jul; 64(4):618-27. PubMed ID: 16538739
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Infanticide or civil rights for women: did the Supreme Court go too far in Stenberg v. Carhart?
    Schmutz SD
    Houst Law Rev; 2002; 39(2):529-66. PubMed ID: 15212035
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Preterm Cleveland v. Voinovich.
    Ohio. Court of Appeals, Franklin County
    Wests North East Rep; 1993 Jul; 627():570-92. PubMed ID: 12041182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Court reaffirms Roe but upholds restrictions.
    Fam Plann Perspect; 1992; 24(4):174-7, 185. PubMed ID: 1526274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Planned Parenthood of Idaho v. Wasden.
    United States. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
    Wests Fed Rep; 2004; 376():908-44. PubMed ID: 17225343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Eubanks v. Stengel.
    U.S. District Court, W.D. Kentucky
    Fed Suppl; 1998 Nov; 28():1024-43. PubMed ID: 11648437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Appeals court finds Utah late abortion restrictions unconstitutional.
    Reprod Freedom News; 1995 Sep; 4(16):2. PubMed ID: 12320245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 13 June 1988.
    United States. District Court, Eastern District of Pennyslvania
    Annu Rev Popul Law; 1988; 15():45. PubMed ID: 12289570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Casey, Bray and beyond: religious liberty and the abortion debate.
    Simmons PD
    St Louis Univ Public Law Rev; 1993; 13(1):467-88. PubMed ID: 11656618
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Reproductive self-determination in the Third Circuit: the statutory proscription of wrongful birth and wrongful life claims as an unconstitutional violation of Planned Parenthood v. Casey's undue burden standard.
    Intromasso C
    Womens Rights Law Report; 2003; 24(2):101-20. PubMed ID: 15568248
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The Supreme Court, abortion, and the jurisprudence of class.
    Mariner WK
    Am J Public Health; 1992 Nov; 82(11):1556-62. PubMed ID: 1443311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.
    U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
    Fed Report; 1991 Oct; 947():682-727. PubMed ID: 11648596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Abortion and the law: the Supreme Court, privacy, and abortion.
    Marsh FH
    Adv Bioeth; 1997; 2():107-23. PubMed ID: 12348324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Legal aspects of abortion practice.
    Goldman EB
    Clin Obstet Gynaecol; 1986 Mar; 13(1):135-43. PubMed ID: 3709009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Planned Parenthood v Casey. The impact of the new undue burden standard on reproductive health care.
    Benshoof J
    JAMA; 1993 May; 269(17):2249-57. PubMed ID: 8474205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.