Search

Clopper sues Oregon to force state to ban circumcision

circumcisionchoice3
Mar 31
3 min read

Updated: 2 days ago

March 31, 2025

Last week Attorney Eric Clopper filed a lawsuit against the state of Oregon based on a law prohibiting female genital mutilation. The Los Angeles attorney seeks to force the Beaver State to expand the prohibition to include circumcision. [1][2]

Clopper gained notoriety in 2018 when he performed a one-man play "Sex and Circumcision: An American Love Story" - a 2-hour rant that included a nude sex act - at a Harvard campus theater. After Harvard fired Clopper from his position as a systems administrator, he sued the university for defamation and civil rights violations. Clopper lost at the district and appeals court levels, and in 2023 the U.S. Supreme Court denied his request for appeal. [3]

Undeterred, Clopper is convinced that this time he has a winning strategy. He recruited five plaintiffs, four of whom were circumcised in Oregon hospitals. The youngest plaintiff was circumcised during August 2007 - more than 17 years ago. In the lawsuit Clopper argues that the consent forms signed by parents of the four male plaintiffs are invalid because the physicians did not provide full disclosure (i.e. unproven intactivist claims.) [4]

Kevin Bacon as Eric Clopper; Mark Metcalf as the legal system

Clopper outlined his strategy in a video posted last year. First, he argued that a state's FGM laws violate the equal protection clauses in the state constitution. Second, compel the state’s judicial branch to overturn the FGM law. And third, have the state legislature rewrite the law to include circumcision (and intersex surgery) in the ban. [5] After Oregon, Clopper plans to file lawsuits in Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, and Rhode Island. He plans to sue up to 41 states and vows to end "non-religious circumcision" within two years. [6]

The arguments in our 2018 article on the U.S. Constitution can be applied to address the claims in the lawsuit. [7] An FGM law would pass intermediate scrutiny standard because it furthers an important government interest. Unlike FGM, circumcision provides medical benefits and the risk of harm is very low.

It's questionable whether his clients even have legal standing to file the lawsuit. The plaintiffs aren't seeking damages for personal injuries or malpractice. Rather, they are asking the court to extend the FGM prohibition to include circumcision. Paradoxically the lawsuit states that the plaintiffs would not object if the court includes an exemption for (Jewish) religious circumcisions. This assertion is pragmatic, not principled - because Clopper doesn't want the lawsuit thrown out on religious grounds. [6] However it has the effect of diluting the sincerity of his claim that circumcision violates human rights.

In 2022 an appeals court ruled that the judicial branch could not provide the remedies that plaintiff Ronald Goldman sought in his lawsuit to force the state of Massachusetts to end Medicaid coverage for infant circumcision. [8] An Oregon court might rule similarly and tell Clopper that he must pursue his agenda through the legislative branch.

Finally, Clopper claims that a favorable ruling may allow his plaintiffs to sue their doctors or the facilities where the procedures were performed. Article I Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws - statutes that are retroactively enforced. Whether the courts would honor a civil ex post facto lawsuit is uncertain. Moreover, the plaintiffs might also be barred by the statute of limitations.

[1] Zane Sparling; "Lawyers say Oregon genital cutting law discriminates against boys; seek circumcision ban"; The Oregonian; March 31, 2025

[2] Hadachek v Oregon, 25CV18224

[3] Andrew Gross; "Supreme Court rejects Clopper v Harvard appeal"; Circumcision Choice; October 3, 2023

[4] Hadachek v Oregon, Footnote 178: "Physicians must obtain informed consent of the patient (or his parents if he is a minor) prior to any surgery. This requires a full disclosure of what the surgery entails, the material risks of the surgery, and what feasible alternatives are available to the patient... Dane’s physicians did not disclose to his parents that the foreskin is a highly functional body part with the densest concentration of nerve endings on the male body, that a feasible alternative is to keep Dane intact, and that circumcision complications are common, including the excessive bleeding Dane suffered. As such, Dane’s parents’ 'consent' to Dane’s circumcision was invalid.”