太原大便有血丝粘液(山西脱垂痔疮怎么治) (今日更新中)

The United States Supreme Court is expected to rule on several major cases next week impacting everything from abortion rights to the presidential election. Traditionally, the court issues all of it's rulings by the end of June to go on recess by early July. It's unclear this year however if the Supreme Court will extend its rulings if they are behind because of the pandemic. The Supreme Court said in advance what days justices will issue opinions, but would not announce which specific opinions will be announced on those days. Rulings typically come down around 10 a.m. ET.EXPECTED CASE #1 SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE CHANGES?In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, the ruling could allow students in religious schools the ability to seek private scholarships funded through state income-tax credits. For years such programs were thought to be incompatible with Montana's constitutional ban on public aid to religious schools, however the Supreme Court could allow the program to exist. Because similar bans exist in 38 states, the ruling could change the definition of the separation of church and state. EXPECTED CASE #2CHANGE TO ABORTION RIGHTS?In June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, the ruling could impact the future of abortion rights across the country. The ruling examines whether a Louisiana law, which requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges in nearby hospitals, is constitutional. Abortion-rights activists say it will lead to clinics being shut down because most providers don't work with hospitals. More importantly, the ruling could tell anti-abortion leaders across the country that the High Court may be open to changes to Roe v Wade in the future. EXPECTED CASE #3ELECTORAL COLLEGE CONFUSION?In Colorado Department of State v. Baca, the ruling could result in major confusion in the 2020 election. The case is out of Colorado where in 2016, state electors to the electoral college attempted to vote for someone other than the winner of Colorado, Hillary Clinton. The electors were removed and replaced with someone to deliver the actual result, however it raised questions over how much power do these electors really have. EXPECTED CASE #4PRESIDENT TRUMP TAX RETURNS?In Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP and Trump v. Deutsche Bank, the question is whether the president has to comply with subpoenas for personal records. Does the power of the presidency allow President Donald Trump to say "no" when it comes to revealing his tax returns? If the Supreme Court rules against President Trump, it could create a new controversy for the President ahead of the election. 2615

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Monday to put on hold a federal appeals court ruling from last week that narrowed the scope of the travel ban as it applies to a certain class of refugees.In a brief filed with the Supreme Court, Justice Department lawyers said that a three-judge panel from the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals was wrong to exempt those refugees who have a contractual commitment from resettlement organizations.In a one-sentence order issued Monday afternoon, Justice Anthony Kennedy -- who has jurisdiction over the 9th circuit -- granted the government a temporary stay until Tuesday in order to give the challengers time to respond to the government's petition.The travel ban bars people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering the US.Last week, the lower court narrowed the scope of the travel ban for extended family members such as grandparents and refugees.In his filing, acting Solicitor General Jeff Wall said DOJ was only asking for a stay for the lower court ruling as it applies to the refugees. Wall said the administration has already been allowing in close family members, but allowing in the refugees would "upend the status quo and do far greater harm to the national interest."The issue of the scope of the ban has been playing out in the lower courts, but the Supreme Court is set to hear the larger issues concerning the merits of the case on October 11. 1442

The Wisconsin Department of Justice's special agent, Kozak, has been on the job for two and a half months.During that short time, he's accomplished a lot more than any human is capable of. Yes, that's right. Kozak is a four-legged special agent.He's a yellow Labrador that's received four months of training on how to sniff out electronic storage devices: cell phones, thumb drives, tiny memory cards and more.He is one of 30 dogs nationwide trained to smell a chemical compound found inside of these devices. To put it simply, he can smell a glue that humans can't."It's an adhesive that's used in the motherboards of electronic devices that contain storage," said Special Agent Joe Mech, who heads the DOJ's Internet Crimes Against Children division.Mech explained why this canine's job is so essential."Kozak helps us find storage devices that may contain child pornography or child exploitation material," he said.Mech said criminals try to hide the electronic evidence in their homes and sometimes human investigators will overlook them. Kozak sits and huffs when he locates any electronic storage device.But Kozak also works on homicide, drug and missing persons cases, too, anything where electronic storage units are involved.He is deployed all over the state of Wisconsin. Recently, Kozak helped search the home of missing teenager Jayme Closs. Mech said he believed he recovered a tablet in that search.Mech said he's been used eight times so far, recovering 14 devices.Mech said it's too early to tell if the evidence he recovered will help in the cases.So how did the DOJ end up having a dog like this? Kozak's handler, Special Agent Tami Pawlak, said the department has this canine all because of a woman from Pittsburgh, Alicia Kozakiewicz.When she was 13-years-old, a man kidnapped Kozakiewicz and held her hostage, posting videos of her abuse online. Now 30 years old, Kozakiewicz raises awareness about child sexual exploitation online.Alicia's Law passed in many states, including Wisconsin. Money from it provides funding for dogs like Kozak, which can be very expensive. The initial cost of Kozak and his training totals ,000.The DOJ said initial funding from Alicia's Law was million. An additional .5 million was granted for this current biennium."One thousand predators have been arrested in the last two years since Alicia's Law has passed," said Kozakiewicz.In case you are wondering, yes. Kozak is named after Kozakiewicz."Alicia is a warrior, so it was an honor to be able to name our dog after her," said Special Agent Pawlak.One day, Kozakiewicz and Kozak hope to meet."He's going to help so many lives and put so many bad people away," Kozakiewicz said.Kozak is the only dog in Wisconsin doing this type of work. As of right now, the DOJ doesn't have any plans to bring another on board.In the meantime, Kozak found his niche. Pawlak said he was initially trained as a citizen service dog, but because he was so hyper, he flunked out of his course.Another trainer got a hold of him and his high energy and motivation for food made him a perfect fit for his new role.  3168

The White House has cut ties with a senior adviser to first lady Melania Trump after it was revealed the aide's firm was paid close to million to plan events around President Donald Trump's inauguration.The first lady's office said in a statement that it ended its contract with Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, who had been working as a special government employee."The Office of the First Lady severed the gratuitous services contract with Ms. Wolkoff. We thank her for her hard work and wish her all the best," said spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham.The New York Times first reported Wolkoff's departure.Inauguration committee tax documents revealed last week showed WIS Media Partners, a company based in Marina Del Ray, California, and founded by Wolkoff, received ,843,509 for "event production services."The roughly million the company received for its work on the inauguration was likely passed through to other vendors and event coordinators. The New York Times reported that Wolkoff personally received .62 million for her work.She told the Times on Monday that most of the million was paid to subcontractors, and that the .62 million was divided among 15 employees. Messages left by CNN with Wolkoff were not immediately returned.Last week, Grisham said Melania Trump "had no involvement" in planning the inauguration and had "no knowledge of how funds were spent."Trump and Wolkoff are longtime friends.  1438

The U.S. regulators who will decide the fate of COVID-19 vaccines are taking an unusual step: Asking outside scientists if their standards are high enough.The Food and Drug Administration may have to decide by year’s end whether to allow use of the first vaccines against the virus. Thursday, a federal advisory committee pulls back the curtain on that decision process, debating whether the guidelines FDA has set for vaccine developers are rigorous enough.“We will not cut corners, and we will only use science and data to make that determination,” FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn pledged at a meeting of the Milken Institute Wednesday.Exactly how much data his agency needs to be sure a vaccine is safe and effective is a key question for the advisers. An even bigger one: If the FDA allows emergency use of a vaccine before final testing is finished, will that destroy chances of ever learning just how well that shot -- and maybe competitors still being studied -- really work?“We can’t lose sight of the fact that it is in our societal interest to see these trials to completion,” said Dr. Luciana Borio, a former FDA acting chief scientist who will be watching the advisers’ debate.Plus, multiple vaccines are being studied -- shots made with different technologies that each have pros and cons.“The first vaccine is not necessarily the best vaccine,” cautioned Dr. M. Miles Braun, a former FDA scientist now with Georgetown University School of Medicine. If the trials aren’t allowed to finish, it may be difficult or impossible to ever know for sure.It’s a critical moment in FDA’s 114-year history. The government has spent billions to race a vaccine through a research process that usually takes years, and FDA faces unprecedented pressure from the Trump administration, fueling public skepticism that politics could overrule science.Interest is so high, FDA is airing the meeting on YouTube. Here are some key issues the committee will discuss:HOW MUCH EVIDENCE IS NEEDED?FDA is requiring manufacturers to do studies of at least 30,000 people to prove if a vaccine protects and how safe it is. Those studies must include adequate numbers of people at highest risk from COVID-19 -- older adults, minorities and anyone with underlying health problems.FDA has made clear that any vaccine must be at least 50% effective. And while the studies are designed to run for two years, companies may get enough evidence the shots are protective -- in at least some people -- to stop the trials early and seek what’s called an “emergency use authorization” for wider vaccinations.Despite White House objections, the FDA told vaccine makers earlier this month not to seek that speedier review until they’ve tracked at least half their trial participants for two months. With other vaccines, that’s about the amount of time when major side effects crop up.That’s not long enough, said the head of the non-profit ECRI Institute, which reviews medical technology for hospitals and insurers. In comments submitted to the advisory committee, ECRI’s Dr. Marcus Schabacker said FDA should require six months of follow-up.“Doing any less would simply risk too much, and the consequences may be severe,” he wrote. “A weak vaccine that loses public trust could poison the well for epidemic control for many years.”WOULD EMERGENCY USE DERAIL FULL ANSWERS ABOUT VACCINES?Normally when a study ends because of evidence that a vaccine is working, the participants who got dummy shots are offered the real thing.But if FDA allows emergency use of a COVID-19 vaccine, that’s not the same as having full proof the shot works, Borio cautioned.And if the participants in the placebo group are immediately offered the real shot, researchers may not be able to get answers about all the high-risk groups in the study — or tell how long the vaccine’s protection lasts, a process expected to take many more months.But Pfizer Inc., which with Germany’s BioNTech is developing one of the leading candidates, told FDA that if it’s granted emergency use authorization, it “would have an ethical obligation” to alert study participants who got a placebo and allow them vaccine access. The company wants FDA to look into “other scientifically and statistically sound methods” to determine long-term safety and effectiveness.Pfizer’s stance is likely to face pushback. The Infectious Diseases Society of America states that FDA’s panelists “should insist” that vaccine developers “present a compelling case” for how they will complete their trials if FDA grants early authorization of their vaccine.Clearing a vaccine based on premature or faulty data “could cause more harm” by “further eroding public confidence in all vaccines,” the group said.It’s an unprecedented dilemma. The FDA has previously allowed emergency use of only one vaccine, a decades-old shot that in 2005 was authorized to prevent anthrax poisoning.This time around, multiple COVID-19 vaccines are in the pipeline. Pfizer competitor Johnson & Johnson cautioned that early FDA clearance of one vaccine could “jeopardize integrity” of other ongoing trials if patients decide to drop out to seek the first cleared shot instead.The company asked regulators to explain what options are available to ensure completion of all ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials.WHAT ABOUT LONG-TERM SAFETY MONITORING?Even a study of 30,000 people cannot spot a side effect that only strikes 1 in 100,000. So the government is planning extra scrutiny of every COVID-19 vaccine to hit the market.At first there will be limited doses given to just certain high-risk people -- and those early recipients are to get text messages daily for the first week after vaccination, and then weekly out to six weeks, asking how they’re feeling.FDA also will be checking databases of electronic health records and insurance claims, looking for any red flags.“There’s a kind of tracking that has to take place here on a massive basis that hasn’t taken place before,” said Dr. Jesse Goodman of Georgetown University, a former director of the FDA’s vaccine and biologics center.___The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content. 6274

来源：资阳报