山西脱肛怎么治(山西切痔疮的价格) (今日更新中)

It may not have been an Oscar, but Dwayne Johnson graciously accepted the award anyway."The Rock" posted a video Sunday on Instagram accepting a Razzie for last year's "Baywatch." The Golden Raspberry Awards, known as the Razzies, celebrate the best of the worst in Hollywood.Along with the video, the star wrote, "So let me go ahead and take this "L" right on the chin for Baywatch. Win some, lose some, but hey... that's the way love goes.""Happy Oscars Sunday!" he said in the video. "I'm super pumped and very proud for my buddies who've been nominated tonight, pulling for you guys to bring home the gold. I'm also excited because I was just informed that I too am bringing home the gold tonight."  716

INTERACTIVE MAP: Where the Woolsey?Fire is burning in Ventura and LA countiesLOS ANGELES (CNS) - A smoke advisory remained in effect Saturday due to the Woolsey Fire, which was causing unhealthy air quality affecting everyone in areas directly impacted by smoke, including central and northwest coastal Los Angeles County, the San Fernando Valley and the western San Gabriel Valley.A growing blanket of brown smoke crept across the Southland sky on Saturday, as the fire in Los Angeles and Ventura counties grew to 70,000 acres with zero percent containment."It is difficult to tell where ash or soot from a fire will go, or how winds will affect the level of dust particles in the air, so we ask everyone to be aware of their immediate environment and to take actions to safeguard their health," said Dr. Muntu Davis, health officer for Los Angeles County."Smoke and ash can be harmful to health, even people who are healthy," Davis said. "People at higher risk include those with heart or lung diseases, children and older adults."Early Saturday, the smoke created an eerie, fog-like presence that extended far south along the coast, including the Marina del Rey and LAX area. That lifted by around noon, but as the afternoon wore on the sky grew gradually darker over large swaths of Los Angeles County.Davis urged everyone in areas where there is visible smoke or the smell of smoke to avoid unnecessary outdoor exposure and to limit physical exertion, whether indoor or outdoor, such as exercise.Children and people who have air quality-sensitive conditions, such as heart disease, asthma and other chronic respiratory diseases, should follow the recommendations and stay indoors as much as possible, even in areas where smoke, soot or ash cannot be seen or there is no smell of smoke, according to DPH officials.The health department is "also advising schools and recreational programs that are in session in smoke-impacted areas to suspend outside physical activities in these areas, including physical education and after- school sports, until conditions improve," Davis said. "Non-school-related sports organizations for children and adults are advised to cancel outdoor practices and competitions in areas where there is visible smoke, soot or ash, or where there is an smell of smoke. This also applies to other recreational outdoor activity, such as hikes or picnics, in these areas."According to DPH, people can participate in indoor sports or other strenuous activity in areas with visible smoke, soot or ash, provided the indoor location has air conditioning that does not draw air from the outside and all windows and doors are closed.Wildfire smoke is a mixture of small particles, gases and water vapor, and the primary health concern is the small particles, which can cause burning eyes, runny nose, scratchy throat, headaches and bronchitis, health officials said. In people with sensitive conditions, the particles can cause difficulty breathing, wheezing, coughing, fatigue, and/or chest pain.DPH offered the following recommendations:-- If you see or smell smoke, or see a lot of particles and ash in the air, avoid unnecessary outdoor activity to limit your exposure to harmful air. This is especially important for those with heart or lung disease (including asthma), the elderly and children.-- If outdoor air is bad, try to keep indoor air as clean as possible by keeping windows and doors closed. Air conditioners that re-circulate air within the home can help filter out harmful particles.-- Avoid using air conditioning units that only draw in air from the outside or that do not have a re-circulating option. Residents should check the filters on their air conditioners and replace them regularly. Indoor air filtration devices with HEPA filters can further reduce the level of particles that circulate indoors.-- If it is too hot during the day to keep the doors or windows closed and you do not have an air conditioning unit that re-circulates indoor air, consider going to an air conditioned public place, such as a library or shopping center, to stay cool and to protect yourself from harmful air.-- Do not use fireplaces (either wood burning or gas), candles, and vacuums. Use damp cloths to clean dusty indoor surfaces. Do not smoke.-- If you have symptoms of lung or heart disease that may be related to smoke exposure, including severe coughing, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, wheezing, chest tightness or pain, palpitations, nausea or unusual fatigue or lightheadedness, contact your doctor immediately or go to an urgent care center. If life-threatening, contact 911.-- When smoke is heavy for a prolonged period of time, fine particles can build up indoors even though you may not be able to see them. Wearing a mask may prevent exposures to large particles. However, most masks do not prevent exposure to fine particles and toxic gases, which may be more dangerous to your health.-- Practice safe clean-up following a fire. Follow the ash clean-up and food safety instructions at http://bit.ly/SafeFireCleanup.The following is recommended for pets:-- Avoid leaving your pets outdoors, particularly at night. Pets should be brought into an indoor location, such as an enclosed garage or a house.-- If dogs or cats appear to be in respiratory distress, they should be taken to an animal hospital immediately. Symptoms of respiratory distress for dogs include panting and/or an inability to catch their breath. Symptoms for cats are less noticeable, but may include panting and/or an inability to catch their breath. 5583

It may not be as oft-quoted as the First Amendment or as contested as the Second Amendment, but the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution plays a critical role in supporting some of our closest-held notions of American freedom and equality.For one, it clearly states that American citizenship is a birthright for all people who are born on American soil -- something that President Donald Trump has announced he wants to end. Not only would this unravel 150 years of American law, it would loosen a significant cornerstone of the Constitution's interpretation of American identity.In order to better understand this part of the 14th Amendment, we asked two experts in constitutional and immigration law to walk us through the first section. The amendment has five sections, but we will only be dealing with the first, which contains the Citizenship Clause and three other related clauses.But first, some historyThe 14th Amendment is known as a Reconstruction amendment, because it was added to the Constitution after the Civil War in 1868. That places it at an important historical crossroads, when lingering wounds of divisiveness and animosity still plagued the nation and the reality of a post-slavery America begged contentious racial and social questions."Thomas Jefferson said men were created equal, but the original Constitution betrayed that promise by allowing for slavery," says Jeffrey Rosen. "The 13th, 14th and 15th amendments were designed to enshrine Lincoln's promise of a new America."However, as so often is the case, this reaffirmed American ideal fell short of reality. Rosen notes that issues of civil rights and equal treatment continued to be denied to African Americans, LGBT people and other citizens for more than a century after the amendment's ratification.And Erika Lee points out that Native Americans weren't even allowed to become citizens until 1925."Even as [these amendments] were written, obviously there were major built-in inequalities and maybe at the time weren't intended to apply to everyone," Lee says.Why was citizenship by birthright such an important concept?"Citizenship was a central question left open by the original Constitution," says Rosen. "At the time it was written, the Constitution assumed citizenship, but it didn't provide any rules for it. In the infamous Dred Scott decision, the Chief Justice said African Americans can't be citizens of the US and 'had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.'"The US Supreme Court's ruling in the Dred Scott case, named for a slave who unsuccessfully sued for his freedom, has since been widely condemned.READ MORE: Scott v. Sandford"The 14th Amendment was designed to overturn this decision and define citizenship once and for all, and it was based on birthright," Rosen says. "It is really important that it's a vision of citizenship based on land rather than blood. It is an idea that anyone can be an American if they commit themselves to our Constitutional values."What does it mean to be "subject to the jurisdiction thereof?"According to Rosen, this is one of the greatest questions of citizenship. There are two clear examples of people not subject to the jurisdictions of the United States: diplomats and their children, and -- at the time of the 14th Amendment -- Native Americans, who were not recognized as part of the American populace."With those two exceptions, everyone who was physically present in the United States was thought to be under its jurisdiction," Rosen says. "There are numerous Supreme Court cases that reaffirm that understanding, and almost as importantly, there are lots of congressional statutes that assume birthright citizenship."Some scholars, like John Eastman of the Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, have argued that children of illegal immigrants are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the US and thus should not be considered citizens under the Constitution.But Rosen says this is a minority view among constitutional scholars of all political backgrounds."While the Supreme Court has not explicitly ruled [on the instance of children of illegal immigrants], Congress has passed all kinds of laws presuming their citizenship," Rosen says.What is the connection between birthright citizenship and immigration?In 1898, 30 years after the 14th Amendment was adopted, the Supreme Court reached a defining decision in a case known as the United States v. Wong Kim Ark. Lee explains that Wong Kim Ark was the American-born son of Chinese immigrants."Asian immigrants were the first immigrants to the US that couldn't be considered white," Lee says. "So they are treated differently. They are taxed differently, they are stripped of many rights. In the 1880s, they are excluded from immigration and barred from citizenship."READ MORE: The United States v. Wong Kim ArkSo, the main question of the case was, could a person born in America be a citizen in a place where his parents could not be as well? The Supreme Court decided yes, and the case remains the first defining legal decision made under the banner of birthright citizenship."[The Supreme Court's decision] said that the right of citizenship is not a matter of inheritance, that it never descends from generation to generation, it is related to where you're born," Lee says. "It's about the power of place. That has been a very expansive, and at the time, a corrective measure to a more exclusionary definition both legally as well as culturally as to what an American is."Why must it be stated that the privileges of citizenship need to be protected?Before the Civil War, states didn't necessarily have to follow the provisions stated in the Bill of Rights; only Congress had to. The 14th Amendment changed that."This second sentence of the Amendment means that states have to respect the Bill of Rights as well as basic civil rights and the rights that come along with citizenship," Rosen says. "The idea was that there were rights that were so basic; so integral to citizenship that they could not be narrowed by the states."Despite the promises and protections of citizenship, Lee says it is abundantly clear that different racial groups were, and often are, seen as unable or unworthy to function as true American citizens. After all, basic rights of citizenship, like suffrage and equal treatment, were denied certain racial groups for a hundred years after the 14th Amendment."The idea of a law applying to 'all people' seems to be clear. But in reality, the debate and the laws and practices that get established are very much based on a hierarchy of, well sure, all persons, but some are more fit and some are more deserving than others," she says.Throughout history, Asian immigrants, Mexican immigrants, Muslim immigrants and their children, to name a few, have had unspoken cultural caveats applied to their ability to be Americans."For Asian immigrants, the racial argument at the time was that 'It didn't matter whether one were born in the US or not, Asians as a race, are unassimilable. They are diametrically opposite from us Americans,'" Lee says."That was the argument that was used to intern Japanese citizens. It was the denial of citizenship in favor of race: 'The ability to become American, the ability to assimilate, they just didn't have it.'"Why was it important to legalize rights for non-citizens?So far, we've covered the first clause, the Citizenship Clause, and the second, the Privileges and Immunities Clause. These both deal with American citizens.The final two clauses, the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection clause, are a little different, and deal with the rights of all people in the United States.Eagle-eyed Constitution readers will notice that the 14th Amendment contains a "due process" clause very similar to the Fifth Amendment. This, says Rosen, was a technical addition to ensure the Fifth Amendment wasn't theoretically narrowed down to protect only American citizens."The 14th Amendment distinguishes between the privileges of citizenship and the privileges of all people," Rosen says. "The framers [of the amendment] thought there were certain rights that were so important that they should be extended to all persons, and in order to specify that they needed a new 'due process' clause."What does it mean to have 'equal protection of the laws'?"At the time following the Civil War, at its core, it meant all persons had the right to be protected by the police, that the laws of the country should protect all people," Rosen says. "In the 20th century, more broader questions were litigated under the 14th Amendment, like Brown v. Board of Education -- whether segregation was constitutional. Cases involving the internment of Japanese citizens, case from the marriage equality decisions, even Roe vs. Wade have strains of equal protection language and invoke due process law."READ MORE: Brown v. Board of EducationAnother interesting case that speaks directly to the immigration side of the 14th Amendment debate is the 1982 case of Plyler v. Doe, in which the Supreme Court ruled it was unconstitutional for the state of Texas to deny funding for undocumented immigrant children.READ MORE: Plyler v. DoeWhy are we talking about all this right now?This week,?Trump vowed to end the right to citizenship for the children of non-citizens and unauthorized immigrants born on US soil.But his interest in repealing birthright citizenship isn't a new idea. Lee says for the last 30 years or so, there have been several overtures by the political right to explore "citizenship reform," a timeline that she says aligns with the ascendancy of modern American conservatism.Lee fears if the current push to end birthright citizenship is successful, it could have wider implications than most people assume. People from other countries who are here legally on work or student visas, for instance, could have children who do not legally belong to the only country they know."There have been attempts since the 1990s to break away birthright citizenship, or narrow it down, and it did not seem that they would have a chance at succeeding until now," she says."To me this not only reflects the ascendancy of an extreme right position but also a return to a very narrow and exclusionary definition of Americanness." 10356

It's a place known for some of the most incredible sightseeing in Arizona, but even with its beauty, it's no stranger to tragedy."It breaks my heart," said Andrea Lankford, a former park ranger at the Grand Canyon National Park. "I looked at her pictures. She looks like such a nice person. I'm sorry to her family."Arizona resident, 59-year-old Maria Andrea Salgado Lopez, died Friday, July 3, after falling off a rim west of Mather Point. It's an area Lankford says can see hundreds of tourists at a time."That's often your first view of the Grand Canyon when you come," she added. "There's also a lot of what we call 'social paths,' where people are going your own way and trying to get a unique view or unique photo."Grand Canyon Park officials say Salgado Lopez was taking photos before she fell. Her body was discovered about 100 feet below the rim."It's really sad to go out there and think you're just going for a vacation and sightseeing, and you come back without your mom or your wife," said Miriam Weiner. She and her daughter were visiting the Grand Canyon for the first time when the woman fell to her death."I saw people out in that area start to hug each other, trying to comfort each other and shield them from what they were seeing," she added. "So, that told me this is really bad."Weiner started recording video shortly after the fall, where you can hear many screaming for help."I just feel really bad for the family," she said. "I've been thinking about what they must be going through and it just brings tears to my eyes."The National Park Service says they see an average of 12 deaths a year at the Grand Canyon, but not all related to falls. Others happen due to heat-related or medical issues. However, Lankford says despite safety measures and previous incidents, falls are not uncommon.She says park rangers aren't always available to watch over visitors either."Their staffing is low and it's a busy park," she said. "Rescue Rangers could very well be busy on another incident while you're at Mather Point, so there's rarely rangers that are standing there to warn you. That's why you have to take personal responsibility for your own safety."The National Park Service and the Coconino County Medical Examiner's office are investigating.This story was originally published by Nicole Valdes at KNXV. 2335

INDIANAPOLIS -- The two suspects accused of shooting into an Indianapolis house last month and killing a 1-year-old girl confessed to the crime, according to preliminary court documents released Thursday.In the preliminary probable cause document, both Darrin Banks, 27, and Brian Palmer, 29, admitted to firing several rounds into a house in the 3500 block of Wittfield Avenue on March 29.Shortly before 2 a.m. on the 29th, officers with the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department responded to the house to find one adult and one child shot.Malaysia Robson, age 1, was killed in the shooting. Robson's 19-year-old aunt, Anna Fox, was also hit. Police say eight to 10 people were inside the home at the time, the majority of which were teenagers.Investigators found about 19 spent .223 casings on the street in front of the house.According to the document, witnesses said the shooting was related to a family dispute that started on social media, and escalated to a fight at an apartment complex before it culminated with the incident on Wittfield Avenue.A person close to both families told police they were told that Banks and Palmer were the ones involved in the shooting, according to the probable cause. On Tuesday, IMPD surveillance units followed Banks and Palmer as they drove around Indy's east side in Palmer's vehicle. When they failed to stop at a stop sign, IMPD initiated a traffic stop, where several officers noticed a "AR-15 type rifle" in the front seat in plain view, according to the document.Two AR-15-style rifles were found in Palmer's vehicle through a search warrant. When police interviewed Banks and Palmer separately, both said they were upset about the previous fight, which resulted in an injury to Banks' pregnant sister. They both admitted, according to the probable cause, to firing at the house, knowing that several people were inside.PREVIOUS | Family: Suspects were playing video games when 1-year-old Malaysia Robson was killedPalmer's mother, Renee Sloan, said Wednesday that both men were home playing video games at the time of the shooting. "The whole community is talking about Darrin Banks and Brian Palmer," Sloan said. "Those are their names. They're not murderers. They're human beings and they have names. They did not do this. That is not in their demeanor. That is not how they work. That is not what they do. I want to have a voice for them. Everyone else has a voice but those two. I want people to know what type of people they are."  2560

来源：资阳报