Boldt v. Boldt: Difference between revisions
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) Add text. |
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) Add text. |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
His mother, Lia Boldt, filed suit in the [https://www.courts.oregon.gov/courts/jackson/Pages/default.aspx Jackson County Circuit Court] for an injunction to prohibit the circumcision | His mother, Mrs. Lia Boldt, filed suit in the [https://www.courts.oregon.gov/courts/jackson/Pages/default.aspx Jackson County Circuit Court] for an injunction to prohibit the circumcision and for change of custody, which was denied (No. 98-2318-D(3)), however the court granted the injunction against the proposed circumcision. Lia Boldt then filed an appeal of the circuit court's decision with the [https://www.courts.oregon.gov/courts/appellate/coa/Pages/default.aspx Oregon Court of Appeals] (OCA).<ref name="svoboda2010" /> | ||
The OCA rejected Lia Boldt's appeal. She then appealed to the [https://www.courts.oregon.gov/courts/appellate/supreme/Pages/default.aspx Oregon Supreme Court] (OSC) in 2007. It was at that point that [[Doctors Opposing Circumcision]] entered the case. Doctors Opposing Circumcision realized that the ORS needed information about circumcision and about the child's rights under Constitutional and international human rights law, so it filed an ''amicus curaie'' brief to help the Court understand why it should accept the case. The brief stated in part: | The OCA rejected Lia Boldt's appeal. She then appealed to the [https://www.courts.oregon.gov/courts/appellate/supreme/Pages/default.aspx Oregon Supreme Court] (OSC) in 2007. It was at that point that [[Doctors Opposing Circumcision]] entered the case. Doctors Opposing Circumcision realized that the ORS needed information about circumcision and about the child's rights under Constitutional and international human rights law, so it filed an ''amicus curaie'' brief to help the Court understand why it should accept the case. The brief stated in part: | ||
| Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
The father, James Boldt, then appealed the decision of the OSC to the United States Supreme Court, however writ of certiorari was denied.<ref>No. | The father, James Boldt, then appealed the decision of the OSC to the United States Supreme Court, however writ of certiorari was denied.<ref>555 US 814. No. 07–1348. Boldt v. Boldt. Sup. Ct. Ore. Certiorari denied. October 6, 2008. Reported below: 344 Ore. 1, 176 P. 3d 388. (2008).</ref> | ||
A long-running legal case in the United States, finally resolved in 2009, when courts in the state of Oregon ruled that a parent could not compel a child over which he had custody to get circumcised against the boy's will. The case is of interest in its potential to limit the power of parents to impose circumcision and similar physical alterations on children and in its implicit recognition that children have their own rights – to physical integrity and freedom of conscience and religion – independently of their parents' belief. | A long-running legal case in the United States, finally resolved in 2009, when courts in the state of Oregon ruled that a parent could not compel a child over which he had custody to get circumcised against the boy's will. The case is of interest in its potential to limit the power of parents to impose circumcision and similar physical alterations on children and in its implicit recognition that children have their own rights – to physical integrity and freedom of conscience and religion – independently of their parents' belief. | ||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
{{LINKS}} | {{LINKS}} | ||
* {{REFweb | * {{REFweb | ||