New York, NY – Several Jewish organizations and three rabbis filed suit today against the New York City Department of Health (DOH) seeking an injunction against regulations that would illegally inhibit and unfairly criticize a form of circumcision that has been safely practiced by Jewish people across the world for thousands of years.
The suit argues that the DOH is attempting to discourage the practice known as metzitzah b’peh (MBP) by requiring all rabbis who perform the ritual, referred to as mohelim, to distribute a form stating that MBP can lead to serious health risks. That regulation violates both the rights to free speech and freedom of religion.
“Not only is the Department of Health wrong about metzitzah b’peh, it is trying to enforce its erroneous opinions on the people of New York City,” said Hank Sheinkopf, spokesperson for the group. “By essentially starting a public intimidation campaign that forces private citizens to spread the government’s beliefs, they are shaking the core of our democracy. We believe the courts will stop this overzealous government overreach and keep them out of our speech and religion.”
The suit argues that “the government cannot compel the transmission of messages that the speaker does not want to express—especially when the speaker is operating in an area of heightened First Amendment protection, such as a religious ritual.”
The lawsuit is supported by affidavits from experts in infectious diseases, epidemiology and statistical analysis that question the assessment and methodology of the DOH in forming its opinion about the safety of MBP.
The suit was filed in federal court in Manhattan and asks to stop the DOH from implementing its regulation. The organizational plaintiffs are the international Bris Association, Agudath Israel of America, the Central Rabbinical Congress of the United States & Canada; the mohel plaintiffs are Rabbi Samuel Blum, Rabbi Aharon Leiman and Rabbi Shloime Eichenstein.
As the suit states on the DOH’s own theory, there have been eighty-four cases of HSV reported in infants over the past five years, and 79 of those cases arose in females, uncircumcised males or males whose circumcision did not include MBP. Yet the few cases that might possibly have arisen after MBP have been the sole focus of the Department’s regulatory attention, leaving entirely unaddressed the other risks of HSV which accounts for well over 90% of reported cases. After correcting for the Department’s methodological errors, these expert affidavits demonstrated that HSV arises no more frequently after MBP than it does in newborns who did not receive MBP.
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
13 Responses
They would have been better off in state court, since it is possible that the New York Court of Appeals will be more sympathetic and find a state constitutional ground for support while also cosidering Federal grounds, whereas a Federal court will only consider Federal grounds.
The case is potentially quite weak, and it might be better to rely on political pressure, which Jews have in New York City, but not on a national level. If the government argues that “metzitzah b’peh” is not required by halacha and can be banned under neutral (non-religious grounds), the government is likely to win the case – and the government doesn’t like being entangled into halachic discussions.
Do you need more evidence that a Jew in office isn’t always the better choice?
Why has Bloomberg’s Health Dept. stubbornly resisted any attempt to prove or disprove its theory of herpes transmission by doing DNA analysis on the mohels and seeing if the DNA matches the herpes infections, which would decisively answer the questions that the City has raised.
The answer is that the City doesn’t really care what the truth is. The City is intentionally muddying-up the waters and creating doubt and confusion to pursue a carefully-hidden agenda to stop all Bris Milah in synagogues, and move them to Hospitals and surgeons, just as is currently being proposed in Germany.
They can’t come out openly right away, because this would create a firestorm, so they’re slowly chipping away at the credibility of the Mohels and undermining their image in the Jewish community by asserting tha they don’t care about the health of Jewish children–a “Blood Libel.”
This is not about Metiztza B’Peh. This is only the opening attack on the whole Mitzvah of Bris Milah, as we have practiced it for over 3,000 years.
To take words from our Rishonim, “M’shim Sekonoh”, and redefine them, to mean that its part of the Mila, is a dangerous precedent. Everyone of the Rishonim and Noiseh Keilm on Shilchon Orech, explain Metzitza as precaution to Sekonoh.
Nu, a link to the complaint?
That there is a legitimate traditional Halachic opinion, including from illuminaries such as the Chasam Sofer, that MBP is not required is something you ignore to discuss, going instead for polemical bombasts.
Here is a link to an article Action Magazine entitled “Metzitzah B’peh Controversy: Rabbinic Polemics and Applying the Lessons of History” –
http://www.ou.org/index.php/jewish_action/article/8976/P1/
From the article:
“The simple understanding of the gemara is that metzitzah is not part of the actual mitzvah of circumcision; instead, it is done to avoid any health hazard to the child after the circumcision.8
“Rambam confirms this reading of the gemara by stating explicitly: “After [circumcision and peri’ah], the mohel suctions the area sufficiently until blood flows from places far away from the wound; he does this in order that the child not be endangered.”
“It is implicit from the Talmudic and post-Talmudic discussions that the method being advocated for suctioning the blood is via the mouth, that is, metzitzah b’peh. No one entertained an alternate method for metzitzah until the nineteenth century. At the same time, no special designation was given to the mouth by the halachic authorities other than that it was the most obvious and convenient method of suctioning.
“The Chatam Sofer and the Sponge –
In 1837, Rabbi Eliezer Horowitz, the chief rabbi of Vienna, was presented with a dilemma. A number of children had become infected with sores after their circumcisions, and some had even died. It was believed that their mohel had transmitted a disease to them, and so a certain Dr. Wertheim of Vienna asked Rabbi Horowitz if, instead of suctioning orally, it could be permitted to squeeze out blood from the brit milah area using a moistened sponge. Rabbi Horowitz’s inclination was to permit the use of a sponge for metzitzah, but he did not want to dispense the heter without first consulting with his revered rebbe, Rabbi Moshe Sofer, the Chatam Sofer. In a letter to Rabbi Horowitz, the Chatam Sofer wrote:
“We only find metzitzah b’peh as a requirement by the kabbalists, who assert that one must mitigate the strict attribute of justice with the mouth and lips. However, we have no dealing with hidden matters if there is at all even the slightest concern of a health hazard…. Therefore, as long as we can draw out the blood from the faraway places, it may be done in any way possible. We should believe the experts regarding which act is as effective as oral suctioning. I will go even further: Even if the Talmud had explicitly stated that one must suction with his mouth [I would still maintain that one may use a sponge], since the act of suctioning is not an integral part of the mitzvah of milah, but is rather merely done to avert danger to the child. To wit, according to the halachah, if one circumcises and does peri’ah but neglects to suction, he has completely fulfilled the mitzvah….”
Finally something is being done to stop this madness where a mayor can tell you which Poisek to listen to. The DOH has clearly violated our First Amendment rights to Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech. That is besides them brushing aside its own protocols and methods of determining health issues. The department of health has no case at all, only its determination to decide which religious practices they “like” and which they don’t, and impose it on all of us.
If this is left to stand then there is no telling what is next. The entire world is watching. If NYC Jews cannot do anything then the rest of the United States will follow and with it the rest of the world. This has to be nipped in the bud (which is quite big already) before the freedoms we cherish here will be chiseled away piece by piece.
be prepared for all your rights & freedoms to be taken away slowly but surely-not in one shot-& soon WE will not be able to live in the USA as frum yidden. all our rights & freedoms are being taken from us one at a time & the USA is about to become what used to be communist russia
pack your bags NOW & head for Eretz Yisroel, while the pressure is not so hard & before america is attacked by iran. for then it will be too late & everyone will be leaving in poverty, wishing they had left-now-when they were told.
BOTTOM LINE:this is all the work of Hashem & the choice is yours if you wish to leave now or wait & suffer ahead C”V
# If the government argues that “metzitzah b’peh” is not required by halacha
It can’t argue that. Under the Lemmon test, a court cannot determine what is the halacha. So long as the plaintiffs insist that MbP is required by halacha, the court must assume that it is so.
#4, you are wrong. Metzitzah is part of milah. The Rambam is clear, and so is every other rishon I’ve seen. Find me one that says it’s not.
#6, The simple understanding of the gemara is that metzitzah is not part of the actual mitzvah of circumcision […] Rambam confirms this reading
This is a blatant lie. The Rambam rules that when doing a bris on Shabbos, if the mohel noticed ציצין שאינן מעכבין before the metzitzah he must cut them off, while if it’s after metzitzah but before bandaging the wound, he must not cut them until after Shabbos. Thus bandaging, which is purely for the baby’s health, is not part of the mitzvah, and is called פירש, while metzitzah is part of the mitzvah and until it’s over he is לא פירש
The Maharam Shick maintained that the Chasam Sofer’s heter was only in an emergency. Who is some writer in Jewish Action to claim otherwise?
As to whether a tube is allowed, it was a huge machlokes haposkim in the 19th century, and all the opinions on both sides are listed by the Sdei Chemed, so anyone who claims that it’s clear that a tube is allowed is a blatant liar. There were great poskim who permitted it but there were at least equally great poskim who forbade it. It is the height of chutzpah for those who follow the mattirim to tell those who follow the oisrim that they are wrong, and must be compelled to use a tube.
#8, Don’t be so sure this won’t happen in Israel. It can easier happen in Israel than in the USA. At least here we have a decent judiciary who take the first amendment seriously; in Israel they do not have that.