New York – A federal appeals court on Friday revived an effort to block a New York City regulation that requires people who perform a Jewish circumcision ritual on infants that involves oral suction to first obtain parental consent.
Join our WhatsApp groupSubscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
A unanimous panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said a trial judge had been too deferential to the city, which had linked the ritual to a deadly form of herpes, in rejecting a request by rabbinical groups for a preliminary injunction.
The three-judge panel directed U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald in Manhattan to instead use “strict scrutiny” to see if the regulation infringed the plaintiffs’ free exercise of religion, violating the First Amendment.
At issue was the ritual metzitzah b’peh (MBP), in which a mohel who performs a circumcision uses oral suction to draw blood away from a wound on an infant’s penis. The procedure is sometimes performed in ultra-Orthodox communities.
In September 2012, the New York City Board of Health voted to require mohels to obtain advance consent in which parents acknowledged the risk of herpes infection linked to the ritual.
This came after city health officials identified 11 cases since 2000 in which infant boys contracted herpes simplex virus (HSV) following circumcisions believed to involve oral suction. Two of the boys died.
The Central Rabbinical Congress of the United States and Canada, Agudath Israel of America, the International Bris Association, Rabbi Shmuel Blum, Rabbi Aharon Leiman and Rabbi Shloime Eichenstein brought the case against the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, the New York City Board of Health and Dr. Thomas Farley, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.
The case was argued in December 2013 before Circuit Court Judges Raymond Lohier, Susan L. Carney and Debra Ann Livingston., but Buchwald denied the request, saying the regulation addressed “legitimate societal concerns.”
Circuit Judge Debra Ann Livingston, however, wrote for the 2nd Circuit that the regulation was not neutral toward religion because it “purposefully singles out religious conduct performed by a subset of Orthodox Jews,” and applies exclusively to them.
As a result she said Buchwald should have not reviewed simply whether there was a rational basis for the regulation.
“The Department (of Health) may have legitimate reasons for addressing HSV infection risk among infants primarily, if not exclusively, by regulating MBP,” Livingston wrote. “On the present record, however, the plaintiffs have made a sufficient case for strict scrutiny by establishing that the risk of transmission by reason of metzitzah b’peh has been singled out.”
The 2nd Circuit did not rule on the regulation’s constitutionality.
The city’s law department had no comment on the decision.
In a joint statement, the plaintiffs called the decision a “great victory,” and said they remain ready to work with city officials “to protect our children’s health while fully respecting and accommodating our religious practice.”
The case is Central Rabbinical Congress of the United States and Canada et al v. New York City Department of Health & Mental Hygiene et al, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 13-107.
Sandy Eller contributed to this report.
If two baby boys died from herpes contracted from MBP, why is this not sakanos nefashos? With today’s options, why does the mohel have to get his mouth involved? Show me that in Torah?
Hodi lashem……. that’s amazing happy news,
Let all this anti-semite already see once & for all going against the Torah they will not win
Gevaldig! Nice to get such good news right before Shabbos.
sad day for infant baby boys
Have we not learned from the Ebola virus?? Do we really want parents to worry that the so called Mohel mumcha that their rebbe recommended to do the milah on their baby will transmit a herpes virus? This is a barbaric and dangerous minhag that should be forbidden. There is no halachic basis for it except for a few rabbonim that are locked into a medieval practice
An argument can be made that this regulation prohibits anyone of any religion from suctioning blood after a circumcision, and is therefore “neutral.”
If c”v there were an Ebola epidemic, would anyone oppose restrictions on taharas hameis, which has helped spread the disease in Muslim Africa?
Disbelieve if you please the theory of evolution, but have some respect for the germ theory of disease.
# 6
# 7
# 9
So therfore you believe the Goverment should be allowed to meddle in religion.
This post is not about Metzizah Bpeh it is about a court ruling that Goverment must use strict scrutiny before regulating a religous practice.
Your reasoning has no bearing on that issue.
the lub rebbe said ine should use a glass tube