Page values for "Partial Reversal"

Jump to navigation Jump to search

"_pageData" values

1 row is stored for this page
FieldField typeValue
_creationDateDatetimeApril 19, 2007 3:12:29 PM
_modificationDateDatetimeApril 19, 2007 3:12:29 PM
_creatorStringYaron Koren
_fullTextSearchtext{{item |author=The Wall Street Journal editorial board |source=The Wall Street Journal |date=April 19, 2007 |url=http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009959 |quote="As a practical matter, this ruling sends the abortion debate back to the states. Some may reintroduce their part ...
_categoriesList of String, delimiter: |Items
_numRevisionsInteger1
_isRedirectBooleanNo
_pageNameOrRedirectStringPartial Reversal
_pageIDOrRedirectInteger3,332
_lastEditorStringYaron Koren
_pageIDInteger3,332
_pageNamePagePartial Reversal
_pageTitleString

Partial Reversal

_pageNamespaceInteger0

"Opinions" values

1 row is stored for this page
FieldField typeAllowed valuesValue
TopicPageGonzales v. Carhart
Position_fragmentStringSupreme Court was correct in its ruling
PositionPageGonzales v. Carhart / Supreme Court was correct in its ruling
Position_linkWikitext

Supreme Court was correct in its ruling

StanceStringfor · mixed · againstfor

"Items" values

1 row is stored for this page
FieldField typeValue
AuthorList of Page, delimiter: ,The Wall Street Journal editorial board
SourcePageThe Wall Street Journal
DateDateApril 19, 2007
URLURLhttp://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009959
QuoteText"As a practical matter, this ruling sends the abortion debate back to the states. Some may reintroduce their partial-birth bans to conform to the 2003 federal law. This is all to the good, since we think the best place to settle abortion disputes is in state legislatures, where a political consensus that better reflects public opinion can be struck."
SummaryWikitext

Partial Reversal by The Wall Street Journal editorial board (The Wall Street Journal, April 19, 2007) (view)