In the United States v. Vuitch case of 1970, the Supreme Court was asked to consider whether a District of Columbia statute criminalizing abortion except when necessary for the preservation of the mother's life or health was unconstitutional. The defendant, Milan Vuitch, a doctor who had been charged with performing an illegal abortion under this law, argued that it violated due process rights because it was vague and infringed on his right to practice medicine. He also contended that it violated women’s constitutional rights by unduly restricting access to abortions. However, in its decision, the Supreme Court upheld both aspects of the law as constitutional. It ruled that "health" could be interpreted broadly enough not only physical but also psychological well-being which made it less vague than claimed by Vuitch and did not violate due process rights; further noting there is no absolute right for a woman to obtain an abortion under all circumstances.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Vuitch, Justice Black argued that the law in question was not vague and did not infringe on a woman's right to privacy. He believed that it was within Congress' power to regulate or even prohibit abortion as they saw fit, based on their moral judgment of its propriety. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "health" in this context to include psychological well-being; instead, he felt it should be limited strictly to physical health risks posed by pregnancy. Finally, Justice Black took issue with the Court’s decision because he thought it would open up floodgates for challenges against other laws regulating medical procedures and practices under similar arguments about vagueness and infringement upon personal rights.