In the 1968 case of McKart v. United States, Joseph McKart was convicted for refusing induction into the armed forces during the Vietnam War. He argued that his local draft board had improperly classified him as available for unrestricted military service despite having a child under his care and support. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of McKart, stating that he should have been allowed to make this argument at trial even though he did not appeal his classification with Selective Service System before refusing induction. The court held that it was unreasonable to require individuals unfamiliar with complex draft laws to navigate through administrative appeals processes without legal counsel or risk losing their right to later challenge their classification in court.

In the dissenting opinion for MCKART v. UNITED STATES, Justice White argued that the majority's decision to allow McKart to challenge his draft classification despite not having exhausted all administrative remedies was a departure from established legal principles. He contended that this could potentially undermine the Selective Service System by encouraging individuals to bypass its procedures and bring their grievances directly to court. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's view that requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies would be futile in this case. Instead, he believed it was important for courts to respect and defer to decisions made by administrative agencies unless there is clear evidence of error or injustice.