Works matching Washington v. Glucksberg
1
- Michigan Law Review, 2008, v. 106, n. 8, p. 1501
- Article
2
- Issues in Law & Medicine, 1997, v. 13, n. 3, p. 315
- Article
3
- Cleveland State Law Review, 2024, v. 72, n. 4, p. 981
- Article
4
- Hastings Center Report, 1997, v. 27, n. 5, p. 25, doi. 10.2307/3527800
- Article
5
- Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy, 2009, v. 16, n. 2, p. 293
- Article
6
- Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 2000, v. 23, n. 2, p. 487
- Article
7
- Elon Law Review, 2014, v. 6, n. 1, p. 1
- Article
8
- Michigan Law Review, 2008, v. 106, n. 8, p. 1571
- Article
9
- Michigan Law Review, 2008, v. 106, n. 8, p. 1517
- Article
10
- Michigan Law Review, 2008, v. 106, n. 8, p. 1453
- Article
11
- Michigan Law Review, 2006, v. 105, n. 2, p. 409
- Article
12
- Issues in Law & Medicine, 1997, v. 12, n. 4, p. 393
- Article
13
- Chapman Law Review, 2017, v. 20, n. 2, p. 421
- Article
14
- Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, 2008, v. 16, n. 1, p. 179
- Article
15
- New York Law School Law Review, 2013, v. 58, n. 2, p. 305
- Article
16
- Duquesne Law Review, 2014, v. 52, n. 1, p. 1
- Article
17
- University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 2018, v. 79, n. 4, p. 753, doi. 10.5195/lawreview.2018.575
- Article
18
- George Mason University Civil Rights Law Journal, 2018, v. 28, n. 2, p. 203
- Article
19
- Ave Maria Law Review, 2015, v. 13, n. 2, p. 207
- Article
20
- Arizona Law Review, 2018, v. 60, n. 2, p. 509
- Article
21
- Hastings Center Report, 1997, v. 27, n. 5, p. 34, doi. 10.2307/3527802
- Article
22
- Hastings Center Report, 1997, v. 27, n. 5, p. 29, doi. 10.2307/3527801
- Article
23
- Law & Contemporary Problems, 1998, v. 61, n. 4, p. 233, doi. 10.2307/1192437
- Article
24
- Revista de Biodireito e Direito dos Animais, 2021, v. 7, n. 2, p. 17
- Borges Ribeiro, Raphael Rego
- Article
26
- Widener Law Journal, 2005, v. 15, n. 1, p. 135
- Article
27
- Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 2001, v. 31, n. 4, p. 1, doi. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubjof.a004912
- Article
28
- New York Law School Law Review, 2013, v. 58, n. 2, p. 321
- Article
29
- California Western International Law Journal, 2018, v. 48, n. 2, p. 219
- Article
30
- Lewis & Clark Law Review, 2017, v. 21, n. 1, p. 245
- Article
32
- Duke Law Journal, 2018, v. 67, n. 4, p. 743
- Article
33
- Arizona State Law Journal, 2018, v. 50, n. 1, p. 141
- Article
34
- American Journal of Bioethics, 2011, v. 11, n. 6, p. 52, doi. 10.1080/15265161.2011.578196
- Article
35
- NAELA Journal, 2017, v. 13, n. 2, p. 71
- Article
36
- UMKC Law Review, 2016, v. 84, n. 3, p. 692
- Article
37
- Issues in Law & Medicine, 2008, v. 24, n. 2, p. 95
- Article
38
- Marquette Law Review, 2014, v. 98, n. 2, p. 973
- Article
39
- Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 2006, v. 34, n. 4, p. 817, doi. 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2006.00102.x
- Article
40
- Issues in Law & Medicine, 1996, v. 12, n. 3, p. 273
- Article
41
- New Mexico Law Review, 2018, v. 48, n. 2, p. 233
- Article
42
- Public Opinion Quarterly, 1999, v. 63, n. 2, p. 263, doi. 10.1086/297716
- Article
43
- Journal of Counseling & Development (Wiley-Blackwell), 2002, v. 80, n. 2, p. 160, doi. 10.1002/j.1556-6678.2002.tb00179.x
- Werth Jr., James L.;
- Gordon, Judith R.
- Article
44
- Lewis & Clark Law Review, 2020, v. 23, n. 4, p. 1417
- Article
45
- Vermont Law Review, 2022, v. 46, n. 3, p. 495
- Article
46
- Houston Law Review, 2015, v. 53, n. 2, p. 595
- Article
47
- National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, 2011, v. 11, n. 1, p. 41
- Article
48
- Virginia Law Review, 2025, v. 111, n. 3, p. 413
- Siegel, Reva B.;
- Ziegler, Mary
- Article
49
- Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy, 2020, v. 15, n. 1, p. 183
- Article
50
- Albany Law Review, 2017, v. 81, n. 4, p. 1337
- Mechmann, Edward T.;
- Carra, Alexis N.
- Article