成都激光治疗静脉曲张成都看血糖足哪家医院,成都下肢静脉血栓手术要价格,成都静脉扩张治疗花多少钱,成都治疗婴儿血管瘤哪个医院好,成都做下肢静脉血栓手术费用,成都男性前列腺肥大哪个医院好,成都哪家治疗雷诺氏症专业

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 lawsuit has been filed against the County of San Diego and the former Assistant Sheriff for sexual harassment and retaliation.The employee began working for the Sheriff’s Department in 2010 at the Vista Detention Facility, according to the lawsuit.Team 10 is not naming her because she said she is a victim of sexual harassment. The woman worked as Administration Secretary for the Detention Services Bureau at the Sheriff’s Headquarters.She alleges in her lawsuit that on at least five separate occasions, “Miller inappropriate hugged [her] and thrusted his crotch area into her so that she would feel his penis against her.”She said the first three times she was hugged in an inappropriate manner was when he was a Commander.RELATED: San Diego County Assistant Sheriff accused of 'inappropriate conduct'?The two most recent times were after he was promoted to Assistant Sheriff. The female employee claimed that Miller made “inappropriate sexual innuendo” to her, including tickling her hand.She stated in her lawsuit that she confided in two Commanders about Miller’s behavior, but did not raise a formal complaint because she feared retaliation.She applied for a new job within the department with Law Enforcement Services Bureau Administrative Secretary II “in order to avoid Defendant Miller and his continued harassment.”She was not granted the transfer. She alleged “Miller demoted her in retaliation for her rejection of his sexual advances and efforts to avoid further harassment by him.”Team 10 contacted the Sheriff’s Department late Monday. A spokesperson said Miller is no longer with the department, since he retired.She added they cannot comment on pending lawsuits. Team 10 is still waiting to hear back from a county spokesperson.The woman suing the County of San Diego and Miller also believed that “the county had received and/or was aware of several complaints from other employees about inappropriate sexual behavior of the Assistant Sheriff.”The lawsuit stated the county took no appropriate action to protect from Miller’s harassment.Team 10 previously contacted Miller when these allegations first arose in February.He told Team 10 investigator Melissa Mecija he could not comment on an ongoing investigation. He also said he “absolutely” denied allegations of inappropriate conduct.In late February, before the lawsuit was filed, a sheriff's spokesperson told Team 10: "Despite the allegations in the claim, the claimant was not demoted. The claimant was assigned to another Sheriff's Department facility, prior to raising a formal complaint, and currently receives the same pay and benefits as she did in her prior assignment." 2664

A child in Galion, Ohio tested positive for meth on Sunday, just hours after trick or treating in the small town located between Columbus and Cleveland, WBNS-TV reported. According to the Galion Police, the boy is expected to make a full recovery after suffering a seizure. The boy reportedly was sickened after playing with fake teeth that were given to him while trick or treating. The boy's father reportedly said that the boy only had a few pieces of candy before getting sick. The Galion Police has not confirmed how the boy became sick from meth, and an investigation is underway. In the meantime, the police department has issued a warning to its residents. "We encourage parents to thoroughly check any candy your children may have received before they eat it," the Galion Police Department said. An expert on Halloween sadism, Joel Best, has previously said that intentional tainting of trick or treat candy is generally rare.“There is this fear out there, and it is terribly overblown,” Best said. “They are worried that some maniac will hand them a contaminated treat, and I can’t find any evidence that has ever resulted to a death or serious injury.” 1201

A Delta Airlines flight from Detroit to Denver was evacuated after landing Tuesday evening at Denver International Airport following reports of smoke in the cabin.Delta Airlines Flight 1854 from Detroit had already been delayed in Detroit for about three hours before the flight departed, according to flight records and a passenger who was on the plane, Jim McManus. 375

A California couple faces allegations of labor human trafficking and wage theft after an employee was reportedly found living at one of their liquor stores in “unhealthy conditions” and being forced to work without getting paid.The couple, Balwinder Singh Mann and Amarjit Mann, were arrested after an investigation by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) uncovered violations involving four employees.The investigation found the couple “harbored at least one of the victims in the back of the store where the individual slept on a mattress,” according to the release from investigators.The Mann’s own two liquor stores in Gilroy, a town about 30 miles south of San Jose.The couple made the employee work 15-hour shifts, seven days a week, and was never paid, according to the Santa Clara District Attorney. Investigators say the employee slept in a storage room and bathed in a mop bucket.The employee was identified after an ABC inspection in February. According to the Santa Clara District Attorney, the agent contacted the employee, and noted a mattress lying over milk crates in a back room, with an office desk filled with clothes and cooking pans.Investigators say labor human trafficking is a “modern-day form of slavery” where the victim is forced, coerced or tricked into involuntary labor.The District Attorney says the investigation concluded the employee had flown from India in 2019, expecting to travel to the U.S. with the Mann’s. Instead, the couple allegedly took his money and passport, and put him to work in their liquor store without the ability to leave.Three other employees told investigators they worked long hours and were paid nearly nothing. The DA says at least one of the employees had no idea about the concept of a minimum wage. The investigation estimates the Mann’s stole more than 0,000 in wages from the four victims. 1890