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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

159 related items for PubMed ID: 12043607

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Supreme Court, 5-4, narrowing Roe v. Wade, upholds sharp state limits on abortion.
    Greenhouse L, Dionne EJ.
    N Y Times Web; 1989 Jul 04; ():1, 10-13. PubMed ID: 11646725
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Webster v. Reproductive Health Services: devaluing the right to choose.
    Binion G.
    Women Polit; 1991 Jul 04; 11(2):41-60. PubMed ID: 11656100
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Planned Parenthood v. Casey: the death of repose in reproductive decisionmaking.
    Nivala J.
    Const Law J; 1993 Jul 04; 4(1):47-95. PubMed ID: 12083095
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. A legal strategy to overturn Roe v. Wade after Webster: some lessons from Lincoln.
    Forsythe CD.
    Brigh Young Univ Law Rev; 1991 Jul 04; 1991(1):519-60. PubMed ID: 11656174
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Criminal liability of physicians: an encroachment on the abortion right?
    Barber RA.
    Am Crim Law Rev; 1981 Jul 04; 18(4):591-615. PubMed ID: 11655468
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. High court's ruling enshrines abortion as fundamental right.
    Barbash F.
    Washington Post; 1983 Jun 17; ():A3. PubMed ID: 11647340
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. The Webster amicus curiae briefs: perspectives on the abortion controversy and the role of the Supreme Court -- amici for appellees.
    Annas GJ.
    Am J Law Med; 1989 Jun 17; 15(2-3):169-203. PubMed ID: 11644396
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. High Court has several options for new look at abortion right.
    Lewin T.
    N Y Times Web; 1991 Jun 20; ():A1, A18. PubMed ID: 11647437
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Justices uphold abortion rights by narrow vote.
    Taylor S.
    N Y Times Web; 1986 Jun 12; ():A1, B10-11. PubMed ID: 11647367
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. High Court, 5-4, affirms right to abortion but allows most of Pennsylvania's limits.
    Greenhouse L.
    N Y Times Web; 1992 Jun 30; ():A1, A15-17. PubMed ID: 11647923
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Workability of the undue burden test.
    Schneider EA.
    Temple Law Rev; 1993 Jun 30; 66(3):1003-37. PubMed ID: 11659882
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Planned Parenthood v. Casey: the role of stare decisis.
    Laird V.
    Mod Law Rev; 1994 May 30; 57(3):461-7. PubMed ID: 11656439
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 8.