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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26410922)

  • 1. Legitimacy Is for Losers: The Interconnections of Institutional Legitimacy, Performance Evaluations, and the Symbols of Judicial Authority.
    Gibson JL
    Nebr Symp Motiv; 2015; 62():81-116. PubMed ID: 26410922
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Legitimacy and the empowerment of discretionary legal authority: the United States Supreme Court and abortion rights.
    Tyler TR; Mitchell G
    Duke Law J; 1994 Feb; 43(4):703-815. PubMed ID: 11656384
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The gap between law and moral order: an examination of the legitimacy of the Supreme Court abortion decisions.
    Wardle LD
    Brigh Young Univ Law Rev; 1980; 1980(4):811-35. PubMed ID: 11655721
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Republican schoolmaster: the U.S. Supreme Court, public opinion, and abortion.
    Franklin CH; Kosaki LC
    Am Polit Sci Rev; 1989 Sep; 83(3):751-71. PubMed ID: 11656011
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Supreme Court's abortion decisions: some observations on the exercise of judicial review in the United States.
    Grossman JB
    Sven Juristtidn; 1973; 58(6-7):449-62. PubMed ID: 11663642
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Biblical biopolitics: judicial process, religious rhetoric, Terri Schiavo and beyond.
    Perry JE
    Health Matrix Clevel; 2006; 16(2):553-630. PubMed ID: 16948251
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Losing deference in the FDA's second century: judicial review, politics, and a diminished legacy of expertise.
    O'Reilly JT
    Cornell Law Rev; 2008 Jul; 93(5):939-80. PubMed ID: 18618965
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Abortion: a new round.
    Greenhouse L
    N Y Times Web; 1989 Nov; ():A1, A24. PubMed ID: 11647875
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The limits of judicial intervention in abortion politics.
    Tatalovich R; Daynes BW
    Christ Century; 1982 Jan 6-13; 99(1):16-20. PubMed ID: 11655445
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Abortion, absolutism, and compromise.
    Carter SL
    Yale Law J; 1991 Jun; 100(8):2747-66. PubMed ID: 11656152
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The future of abortion.
    McDaniel A
    Newsweek; 1989 Jul; 114(3):14-21, 24-27. PubMed ID: 11655929
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The Supreme Court Ruling in Sandoz v Amgen: A Victory for Follow-on Biologics.
    Sarpatwari A; Gluck AR; Curfman GD
    JAMA Intern Med; 2018 Jan; 178(1):5-6. PubMed ID: 29131908
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The Rehnquist Court and tobacco.
    Lutschg JH
    JAMA; 2006 Mar; 295(11):1250-1; author reply 1251. PubMed ID: 16537734
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The abortion power.
    Noonan JT
    Hum Life Rev; 1979; 5(2):16-27. PubMed ID: 11663943
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Death by default.
    Lindgren J
    Law Contemp Probl; 1993; 56(3):185-254. PubMed ID: 10129268
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Making sausage: The Ninth Circuit's opinion.
    Schneider CE
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1997; 27(1):27-8. PubMed ID: 9017412
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Judicial restraint and the non-decision in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services.
    Crain CA
    Harv J Law Public Policy; 1990; 13(1):263-318. PubMed ID: 11649286
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. The FDA and deference lost: a self-inflicted wound or the product of a wounded agency? A response to Professor O'Reilly.
    Vladeck DC
    Cornell Law Rev; 2008 Jul; 93(5):981-1002. PubMed ID: 18618967
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The Supreme Court's influence on medicine and health: the Rehnquist Court, 1986-2005.
    Gostin LO
    JAMA; 2005 Oct; 294(13):1685-7. PubMed ID: 16204668
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.