In the case of Bellotti v. Baird (1975), the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a Massachusetts law that required minors to obtain parental consent before having an abortion, unless their life was in danger. The court found this law unconstitutional because it did not provide an alternative procedure for mature minors or best interest exceptions for immature ones who could demonstrate that they were capable of making informed decisions about their health without parental involvement. This decision upheld the principle established in Roe v Wade (1973) which recognized women's constitutional right to privacy regarding reproductive choices and extended these protections to minor girls as well.

In the dissenting opinion for Bellotti v. Baird, Justice White argued that the Massachusetts law requiring parental consent for minors seeking abortions did not violate constitutional rights. He asserted that it was reasonable and within a state's power to enact laws protecting minors from making potentially harmful decisions without sufficient maturity or understanding of consequences. The justice believed there were compelling interests in encouraging family involvement in such significant decisions and ensuring medical safety by involving parents who would likely be more aware of their child’s health history than the minor themselves. Furthermore, he emphasized that if a minor could demonstrate she was mature enough to make an informed decision or if obtaining consent wasn’t in her best interest, judicial bypass provided an alternative route under this law. Hence, according to him, this statute struck a balance between respecting minors' potential capacity for mature judgment and recognizing their vulnerability due to lack of experience.