As far as I can tell, they divorced before he was born, and had a formal contract agreeing that they would circumcise the boy. She changed her mind, but lost the court case for custody, and lost the court case to counteract the contract.
So Florida is legally mandating that they follow their contract, and that she follows the custody ruling. The father won custody, which includes the right to make medical decisions.
I get the moral issues that exist in this case, but let's not say an entire state is doing something it's not doing.
SourceShe initially agreed in a parenting agreement filed in court, then changed her mind, giving way to a long legal fight. Circuit and appellate judges have sided with the father.
I'd say those two issues (abortion vs circumcision) are two entirely different things. One is bodily autonomy -- the right to control what is in your body (abortion), and the other is legal control over a minor's actions/medical care (circumcision).