In a landmark decision delivered on October 23, 2025, the Multnomah County Circuit Court ruled in favor of Plaintiffs’ constitutional challenge to male genital cutting. Funded by Intact Global, Inc., with an additional $10,000 grant from the Genital Autonomy Legal Defense and Education Fund, the ruling marks a pivotal victory in the fight for children’s bodily autonomy. The court’s decision allows the Plaintiffs’ case to proceed. Specifically, the Court agreed that the Plaintiffs’ constitutional challenge to male genital cutting may state a legally valid claim that laws protecting only female minors from genital cutting may violate the constitution’s guarantees of equal protection. This positive ruling opens the door to changing how Oregon treats its male minors with respect to medically unnecessary genital cutting.

The case, Hadachek, et al. v. State of Oregon – brought forward under the guidance and support of Intact Global – asserts that current laws permitting non-therapeutic genital cutting of male and intersex children violate state constitutional protections of equal rights and bodily integrity. With the court’s allowance for the case to move forward, this decision signals that legal systems will no longer dismiss the serious questions raised about children’s rights under genital cutting practices.

“Today’s ruling is not just a win for our plaintiffs, it’s a win for children everywhere,” said Eric Clopper, attorney, founder & executive director of Intact Global. “The court has recognized that it is legally plausible that Plaintiffs’ circumcisions violated their constitutional right to equal protection and bodily integrity. We are now firmly on the path toward changing the law. The implications are enormous and historic.”

GALDEF Executive Director Tim Hammond added “Offering moral, practical and financial support for this type of impact litigation is the primary mission of the Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund. These cases are extremely challenging and expensive and we thank our donors for making this possible.”

This isn’t just a legal case, it’s a cultural turning point. For generations, non-therapeutic genital cutting of male and intersex children has been treated as a medical or religious issue, rarely examined under constitutional law. This ruling permits the court to issue a substantive legal opinion that can reframe medically unnecessary genital surgery as a violation of fundamental human rights. This legal case marks one of the first times a court has recognized that circumcision may implicate, if not violate, the constitution’s guarantee of equal protection on the basis of sex.

Although the case originates in Oregon, and was reported in Oregon Live, the online version of The Oregonian newspaper, its impact may reach far beyond state lines. Intact Global has plans to bring similar constitutional challenges to other states, with the support of its committed donors. Moreover, since many nations look to U.S. jurisprudence for guidance, continued positive rulings in this case could spark new legal and ethical conversations across continents about children’s rights, cultural practices, and medical consent. It also gives fresh momentum and legitimacy to advocates, legal scholars, and medical professionals who have long argued that bodily integrity is a universal right. Both in the U.S. and abroad, parents, policymakers, and health systems will now have to confront a defining question: if a child’s bodily autonomy matters in one context, why not all?

In short: the conversation shifts from “Is this practice medically benign and culturally acceptable?” to “Is this practice constitutional, ethical, and aligned with children’s rights?” That shift has global resonance.

For more information about Intact Global and the next steps, please visit: IntactGlobal.org