areivim, no, because there’s no medical evidence that circumcision threatens a healthy infant’s safety. The American Academy of Pediatrics notes that there are “potential medical benefits” associated with neonatal circumcision, but that parents should decide for themselves (absent a specific medical reason for it) whether circumcision is right for their child.
I’m not familiar with the situation in Sweden that Bogen mentioned, but American laws are not generally modeled on those of Scandinavian countries. And it is not likely that this sort of law would pass here, where most baby boys are routinely circumcised.