Support for LAist comes from
We Explain L.A.
Stay Connected

Share This

This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.

This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.


Penis Rights: Brown Signs Ban on Circumcision Bans Into Law

Photo by Einar Muoni via Shutterstock
We need to hear from you.
Today during our spring member drive, put a dollar value on the trustworthy reporting you rely on all year long. The local news you read here every day is crafted for you, but right now, we need your help to keep it going. In these uncertain times, your support is even more important. We can't hold those in power accountable and uplift voices from the community without your partnership. Thank you.

Gentlemen and the parents of baby boys in California, you are free to do as you wish with the penises in your purview when it comes to circumcision. Specifically, you will not be subject to a ban on the act of male circumcision, thanks to Governor Jerry Brown signing into law a bill that bans the bans on foreskin removal.

AB 768 came on the heels of ballot initiatives in both San Francisco and Santa Monica to ban circumcision on boys under the age of 18. In San Francisco, the initiative gained enough signatures to go before voters, but was withdrawn from the ballot in Santa Monica.

The bill to counter the San Francisco ballot measure was authored by local state assemblyman Mike Gatto (D-Burbank), who said banning circumcision interfered with "personal, medical and religious freedom."

As made into law, AB 768 precludes "a city, county, or city and county ordinance, regulation, or administrative action from prohibiting or restricting the practice of male circumcision, or the exercise of a parent' s authority to have a child circumcised." Further, AB768 provides "that the Legislature finds and declares that the laws affecting male circumcision must have uniform application throughout the state."

Support for LAist comes from

Opponents of circumcision believe the practice is a form of "genital mutilation."

Most Read