Yes, both duress and necessity remain viable defenses.
The contours of these defenses will vary from state to state, but many states use the Model Penal Code.
MPC § 3.02(1) lays out the necessity defense, which it calls justification:
Conduct that the actor believes to be necessary to avoid a harm or evil to himself or to another is justifiable, provided ...
The earliest mention of the principle that I can find is in Rolston v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland  NI 195, where the matter of compensation for the widow of a police officer murdered in Northern Ireland arose. I am sure there are earlier cases that express the same principle in different terms, however.
It is a broad principle that applies ...
Specifically an insurance company is trying to avoid paying benefit,
relying on an argument that legal tax avoidance was used to defer tax
on certain funds, and so requiring them to pay benefits in
relationship to those funds would be the equivalent of allowing the
policyholder to benefit twice - first in avoiding tax, and then again
by receiving insurance ...