"Bloodsucking Circumcision,"  as Slate characterizes it;
according to this New York Times article,       If the practice
is indeed potentially life-threatening, it seems to me it should
indeed be banned. Despite what I at first thought, it seems that
"the most traditionalist groups, including many Hasidic sects in
New York, consider oral suction integral to God's covenant with
the Jews requiring circumcision," and thus religiously
obligated. The prohibition therefore substantially burdens their
religious beliefs (whether or not we think these beliefs are
sensible).  But, first, it's not clear whether New York law
generally provides for religious exemptions from generally
applicable laws (see In re Miller, 252 A.D.2d 156 (App. 1998)).
And, second, even if it did provide for such exemptions, no
exemptions would have to be granted if enforcing the law is the
least restrictive means of serving a compelling government
interest -- and here it surely is.  Moreover, I would hope that
the ban would indeed be enforceab