Wednesday, November 24, 2010
There is a drive for a ballot initiative in San Francisco that would make the performance of a circumcision on a minor illegal "except where "the operation is necessary to the physical health of the person on whom it is performed because of a clear, compelling, and immediate medical need with no less-destructive alternative treatment available." There is no religious exemption in the proposed language.
Paul Horowitz expresses the view that the initiative would likely pass constitutional muster despite its disproporationate effect on those who seek circumcision for religious reasons. He also raises the question, I think an important one, of whether this is wise policy.