—requiring a minor to show that parental notification is not in her best interests is equivalent to a judicial bypass procedure requiring a minor to show that abortion without notification is in her best interests

The Supreme Court has disapproved the analysis in Glick, in which we held unconstitutional a bypass procedure which allowed a minor to have an abortion if parental notification, and not the abortion itself, was not in the minor's best interests.

—finding statute's judicial bypass provision, allowing waiver of notice requirement if notification was not in minor's best interest, sufficient to protect minor's constitutional right to abortion

—upheld Montana's mandatory parental notification law containing a judicial bypass provision when notification is not in the best interests of the minor.

The Court thereafter has repeatedly "declined to decide whether a parental notification statute must include some sort of bypass provision to be constitutional."

Such a statute must:(i) allow the minor to bypass the consent requirement if she establishes that she is mature enough and well enough informed to make the abortion decision independently;(ii) allow the minor to bypass the consent requirement if she establishes that the abortion would be in her best interests;(iii) ensure the minor's anonymity; and (iv) provide for …

—upholding parental notification statute against constitutional challenge to judicial bypass procedure

In Bellotti, we struck down a statute requiring a minor to obtain the consent of both parents before having an abortion, subject to a judicial bypass provision

—and the Supreme Court has chastised (and reversed) this court for failing to apply Bellotti II and Akron II faithfully.

Absent any indication of child maltreatment, providing information to local law enforcement is itself a harm (Dkt. No. 3, at 20).