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.
44. Abortion and the consideration of fundamental, irreconcilable interests. Jones CJ Syracuse Law Rev; 1982; 33(2):565-613. PubMed ID: 11658668 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. Planned Parenthood v. Casey: the death of repose in reproductive decisionmaking. Nivala J Const Law J; 1993; 4(1):47-95. PubMed ID: 12083095 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
46. Abortion choice and the law in Vermont: a recent study. Olmstead FH Vt Law Rev; 1982; 7(2):281-313. PubMed ID: 11655820 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
47. State legislation on abortion after Roe v. Wade: selected constitutional issues. Bryant MD Am J Law Med; 1976; 2(1):101-32. PubMed ID: 973625 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Abortion rights of young women: the Supreme Court attacks the most vulnerable. Heller S Washburn Law J; 1990; 30(1):15-28. PubMed ID: 11659579 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. Feminist litigation: an oxymoron? -- a study of the briefs filed in William L. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services. Colker R Harv Womens Law J; 1990; 13():137-88. PubMed ID: 11656053 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. Workability of the undue burden test. Schneider EA Temple Law Rev; 1993; 66(3):1003-37. PubMed ID: 11659882 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. 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]
53. The erosion of Roe v. Wade; do minors have any rights? Sourial WH Whittier Law Rev; 1992; 13(1):285-332. PubMed ID: 11656215 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. Abortion compromise -- inevitable and impossible. Law SA Univ Ill Law Rev; 1992; 25(4):921-41. PubMed ID: 11656296 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
55. A thorn in the side of privacy: the need for reassessment of the constitutional right to abortion. Kunz KA Marquette Law Rev; 1987; 70(3):534-71. PubMed ID: 11655884 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
56. S.J. Res. 110: Human Life Federalism Amendment. Hatch OG Congr Rec (Dly Ed); 1981 Sep; 127(131):S10194-8. PubMed ID: 11658572 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
57. When is a pregnant minor mature? When is an abortion in her best interests? The Ohio Supreme Court applies Ohio's Abortion Parental Notification Law: In re Jane Doe 1. Stuhlbarg SF Univ Cincinnati Law Rev; 1992; 60(3):907-61. PubMed ID: 11651633 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
58. Irish abortion: seeking refuge in a jurisprudence of doubt and delegation. Fox M; Murphy T J Law Soc; 1992; 19(4):454-66. PubMed ID: 11656231 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
59. Current technology affecting Supreme Court abortion jurisprudence. Buckley M NY Law Sch Law Rev; 1982; 27(4):1221-60. PubMed ID: 11651778 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
60. The Akron decision: a pragmatic politician's parody of Solomon. Noonan JT Hum Life Rev; 1983; 9(3):5-18. PubMed ID: 11655719 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]