The Cornell University Law School defines “procedural due process” as follows:
“Principle required by the Constitution that when the state or federal government acts in such a way that denies a citizen of a life, liberty, or property interest, the person must first be given notice and the opportunity to be heard.”
Thus, procedural due process consists of two elements:
1) Notice; and
2) Opportunity to be heard.
The “opportunity to be heard” is typically a hearing where you will be found guilty about 98% of the time. Therefore, most reasonable people don’t want the “opportunity to be heard” because it is typically an “opportunity to be sentenced”.
I believe that “opportunity” can be avoided by controlling the notice. I.e., unless you consent to receive only an incomplete notice, the gov-co can’t take you to the “opportunity to be heard [sentenced]” until they’ve give you full and complete notice.
Strangely, my research implies that the notice recipient, rather than the notice sender, controls the express content of every notice. Whenever you receive a notice, you control whether or not that notice is sufficient to allow the sender to take you to the “opportunity to be heard [sentenced]”.