The U.S. Supreme Court case Colautti v. Franklin in 1978 centered on a Pennsylvania law that required doctors to use the same care for fetuses potentially capable of surviving outside the womb as they would for a fetus intended to be born alive, and also mandated reporting requirements for abortions performed after viability. The court ruled 6-3 that the law was unconstitutionally vague because it did not provide clear guidelines about when a fetus becomes viable (able to survive outside of the womb). This ambiguity could cause physicians to avoid performing abortions out of fear of criminal prosecution, thus infringing upon women's constitutional right to choose an abortion. Furthermore, it found that requiring reports on all procedures where gestational age might exceed viability placed an undue burden on both patient privacy and physician compliance without serving any compelling state interest.

In the dissenting opinion for Colautti v. Franklin, Justice Rehnquist disagreed with the majority's decision to strike down a Pennsylvania law requiring doctors to use their best judgment in preserving fetal life when performing abortions potentially viable fetuses. He argued that the court was overstepping its bounds by invalidating state laws based on vague constitutional interpretations. He believed that it is not within the Court’s jurisdiction to decide whether or not a fetus is capable of sustained survival outside of its mother’s womb at various stages of gestation, as this should be left up to medical professionals and legislatures who are more equipped with knowledge about these matters. Furthermore, he contended that there was no evidence showing how many women would actually be affected by this law and therefore found it unnecessary for such an extreme measure as striking down a state statute.