邵阳看妇科哪里好双清区妇科的专科医院,邵东哪个医院看妇科比较好,北塔区哪家妇科好,邵阳医院哪里妇科好,邵阳看妇科哪好,邵阳可以治不孕不育症的医院,邵东有妇科医院

A federal judge on Thursday erupted at the Trump administration when he learned that two asylum seekers fighting deportation were at that moment being deported and on a plane to El Salvador.DC District Judge Emmet Sullivan then blocked the administration from deporting the two plaintiffs while they are fighting for their right to stay in the US -- reportedly excoriating the administration and threatening to hold Attorney General Jeff Sessions in contempt.The government raced to comply with the court's order, and by Thursday evening the immigrants had arrived back in Texas after being turned around on the ground in El Salvador.Sullivan agreed with the American Civil Liberties Union that the immigrants they are representing in a federal lawsuit should not be deported while their cases are pending.The emergency hearing in the case turned dramatic when attorneys discovered partway through the hearing that two of their clients were on a plane to El Salvador.During court, Sullivan was incensed at the report that one of the plaintiffs was in the process of being deported, according to the ACLU and The Washington Post. Sullivan demanded to know why he shouldn't hold Sessions in contempt, according to the Post and the recollection of lead ACLU attorney Jennifer Chang Newell.Chang Newell said the administration had pledged Wednesday that no one in the case would be deported until at least midnight at the end of Thursday. But during a recess in the proceedings Thursday, she got an email from attorneys on the ground in Texas that her client, known by the pseudonym Carmen, and Carmen's daughter had been taken from their detention center that morning and deported. After investigating during recess, she informed government attorneys and Sullivan what had happened."He said something like, 'I'm going to issue an order to show cause why I shouldn't hold the government in contempt, I'm going to start with the attorney general,' " Chang Newell said, explaining that Sullivan was suggesting he would issue an order that would require the government to explain why they didn't deserve to be held in contempt. Such an order has yet to be issued by the court.He ordered the plane turned around or the clients brought back immediately, the ACLU said."This is pretty outrageous," Sullivan said, according to the Post. "That someone seeking justice in US court is spirited away while her attorneys are arguing for justice for her?""I'm not happy about this at all," he continued, adding it was "not acceptable."The lawsuit was brought by immigrants only referred to by their pseudonyms in court: Grace, Mina, Gina, Mona, Maria, Carmen and her daughter J.A.C.F. and Gio.After the hearing, Sullivan issued an emergency order halting the deportation of any of the immigrants as he considers whether he has broader authority in the case.Sullivan also ordered that if the two being deported were not returned, Sessions, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Lee Francis Cissna and Executive Office for Immigration Review Director James McHenry would have to appear in court and say why they should not be held in contempt.The lawsuit brought by the ACLU is challenging a recent decision by Sessions to make it nearly impossible for victims of domestic violence and gangs to qualify for asylum in the US. That decision was followed by implementation guidance from the Department of Homeland Security that almost immediately began turning away potentially thousands of asylum seekers at the southern border.According to their lawsuit, Carmen and her young daughter came to the US from El Salvador after "two decades of horrific sexual abuse by her husband and death threats from a violent gang." Even after Carmen moved away from her husband, he raped her, stalked her and threatened to kill her, the lawsuit states. Further, a gang held her at gunpoint in May and demanded she pay a monthly "tax" or they would kill her and her daughter. Carmen knew of people killed by their husbands after going to police and by this gang and thus fled to the US.But at the border, the government determined after interviewing her that she did not meet the "credible fear" threshold required to pursue an asylum claim in the US, and an immigration judge upheld that decision.The ACLU is using Carmen's story and the similar experiences of the other immigrants to challenge Sessions' ruling on asylum. 4473

A Charlotte County, Florida mom was arrested Wednesday morning after she accidentally ran into her son in the drop-off area of the Port Charlotte High School parking lot.According to the Charlotte County Sheriff's Office, 49-year-old Nadine Williams has a suspended license and gave false identification at the scene.  Williams' son was taken to the hospital with minor injuries.Deputies said they found Williams had a suspension for unpaid traffic fines and a failure to maintain insurance. They also said they found a citation for driving without a license just days before the incident Wednesday morning. When deputies asked her about the suspension, they said she told them she knew she was suspended, but she had to drive because it wasn't "like I'm murdering or raping."  815

A day after the school shooting in Florida, a central Florida teacher posted her thoughts on why she thinks the violence is occurring in America.FULL COVERAGE: Parkland school shootingTeacher Kelly Guthrie Raley of Eustis, Florida, located just north of Orlando, said children "don’t understand the permanency of death anymore."Raley's post had been shared more than 690,000 times by Monday morning. She goes on to say that the mental health, lack of moral values, violent video games and "horrendous lack of parental support" is all contributing to the shootings.   Raley said parents need to “STEP UP!” and be the annoying mom that pries and knows what their child is doing.  She concluded the post by asking, "When are we going to take our own responsibility seriously?"Read the full post below:  852

A day after Judge Amy Coney Barrett mostly sidestepped questions on her judicial views of politically-charged topics, Barrett returned to the Capitol on Wednesday for another marathon session of questioning in her Supreme Court confirmation hearing.On Tuesday, Democrats continued their attempt to pry Barrett into sharing her judicial views on topics like abortion, public healthcare, LGBTQ+ rights and gun control — topics which Barrett is considered to take a conservative slant. However, Barrett continued to repeatedly invoke the "Ginsburg rule.""Justice Ginsburg, with her characteristic pithiness, used this to describe how a nominee should comport herself at a hearing. No hints, no previews, no forecasts," Barrett said on Tuesday.Ginsburg — whose seat Barrett seeks to fill following the longtime justice's death in September — coined the phrase during her confirmation hearings 27 years ago. While she did not set that precedent, she's credited with the concise phrasing that has been recited by many prospective justices in the decades since.But The Associated Press notes that Ginsburg was open on her views of at least one hotly-debated topic — abortion."The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman's life, to her well-being and dignity," Ginsburg said in 1993 during her confirmation hearing, according to the AP. "It is a decision she must make for herself. When Government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices."As Democrats lobbed questions at Barrett regarding her judicial views, the judge offered few insights. Here's how she answered on the following topics:AbortionLike she did on Tuesday, Barrett attempted to avoid answering specific questions regarding her personal views on abortion. However, Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham asked Barrett specifically about legislation he introduced that would prevent a woman from receiving an abortion after 20 weeks. When asked if Barrett would listen to both sides of that case, Barrett said she would.Graham went on to say that if Barrett were to be confirmed, it would punch through a "reinforced concrete barrier" facing conservative women, adding it would be the first time in history that a woman who is "unashamedly pro-life" would be appointed to the Supreme Court.Affordable Care ActBarrett mostly stuck to the "Ginsburg Rule" by attempting not to tip her hand when it came to sharing judicial views. However, questioning from Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, forced Barrett to admit that while she had written negatively about the Affordable Care Act and some Supreme Court rulings upholding it in the past, she had not ever written favorably about the law.Cameras in the Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court has famously been one of the most secretive branches of government. Cameras and recording devices weren't allowed in high court hearings until this year when arguments were forced to be held via teleconference due to the COVID-19. In fact, it wasn't until 2018 that the court published case filings online.However, Barrett said Wednesday that she would "keep an open mind" about allowing cameras in the courtroom moving forward.Climate changeSen. Richard Blumenthal asked Barrett directly if she believed if humans are causing climate change. She declined to answer the question directly and added that she didn't think it was relevant to her job.Her comments come a day after she said during the first day of questioning that she has "no firm views" on climate change and added that she's "not a scientist."COVID-19 lockdownsFeinstein also asked Barrett about a Supreme Court ruling earlier this year in which the court said Wisconsin could not extend mail-in voting during its primary elections. The primary took place on April 7 — in the throes of pandemic-related lockdowns.Feinstein asked Barrett specifically about her view of the case. Barrett declined to give one, again citing the fact that she did not want to provide a judicial view.PolygamyWhen asked by Graham if a group of Americans had a right to polygamous marriage, Barrett declined to give a direct answer, keeping in line with avoiding direct judicial answers.Presidential powersLeahy asked Barrett specifically if a president had a right to pardon himself for any crimes he may have committed. Barrett responded that such a hypothetical was not settled law and that she did not want to speculate lest a similar case come before the courts.ImmigrationSen. Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat who ran for the party's presidential nomination, question Barrett on her views on separating children at the border. "Do you think it is wrong to separate a child from their parent, not for the safety of the child or parent, but to send a message? As a human being, do you believe that that is wrong?"Booker asked. "That's been a matter of policy debate and that's a matter of hot political debate in which I can't express a view or be drawn into as a judge," Barrett responded. What's nextSenators will meet privately to review Barrett's FBI file and background check. On Thursday, witnesses for and against Barrett's confirmation will go before the committee. _____Tuesday's hearings were also beset by technical issues. During Blumenthal's questioning, the committee was forced to take a brief recess when microphones in the room stopped working. Upon the committee's return, microphones again went dead as Blumenthal was wrapping up his time, forcing another brief recess.On Tuesday, Barrett also often invoked the "Ginsburg Rule" when discussing abortion, an upcoming case that could decide the legality of the Affordable Care Act, gun control and voting rights.Barrett was also asked about comments from President Donald Trump, who has hinted in the past that Ginsburg's seat must be filled prior to the election in the event the Supreme Court needs to make a crucial ruling. Barrett did not commit to recusing herself should such a case arise, but said she would consider the case and the recommendations of other justices.Barrett's thorniest stretch on Tuesday came in a denouncement of discrimination of LGBTQ+ people when she used the term "sexual preference." The term, generally deemed to be outdated, is classified as "offensive" by GLAAD because it implies that sexuality is a "choice" that can be "cured." Barrett later apologized for using the term when confronted by Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii.The 22 Senators on the committee were each given 30 minutes to question Barrett on Tuesday. Senators will each be given 20 minutes for questioning on Wednesday. Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, says he hopes to wrap up the confirmation hearing Thursday, and that Barrett is on track to be confirmed later this month, about a week before the 2020 election.Several swing-vote Republicans have already indicated that they will vote to confirm Barrett, suggesting that she will likely be confirmed. 6963

A dire warning from the National Weather Service has forced an evacuation around the College Lake Dam in Lynchburg, Virginia.A flash flood warning issued Thursday night by the NWS reports "if a complete failure of the dam occurs, the water depth at Lynchburg could exceed 17 feet in 7 minutes." The area impacted would be the city of Lynchburg, which is one mile downstream from the dam.An updated report issued just after midnight by the NWS said the dam has not failed, and is being closely monitored by emergency personnel for any signs of structural failure."Lynchburg Water Resources Department reported that 4 to 6 inches of heavy rain earlier in the evening caused College Lake to fill beyond its capacity.Piper Van dePerre, with the Lynchburg Department of Emergency Services, told CNN affiliate WDBJ that crews are working with a list of 124 residences that need to be evacuated because of the imminent threat of a dam break. It's not certain if all the structures are occupied along the rain swollen Blackwater Creek.The University of Lynchburg, which is nearby, says it has not ordered an evacuation because it is not downstream of the dam, according to affiliate WSLS.The CNN Weather Center said there a forecast of 1-3 inches of rain through Friday evening and that rain hasn't been above average, but the runoff is a contributor to the area flooding.The-CNN-Wire 1384