贵阳治疗腿动脉硬化的医院贵阳淋巴血管瘤怎样手术,贵阳腿动脉硬化怎么治疗,贵阳小腿静脉曲张和脉管炎哪里能治,贵阳做静脉血栓手术的费用,贵阳腿部深静脉血栓怎样治疗,贵阳哪里看睾丸精索静脉曲张医院好,贵阳下肢静脉血栓看什么科室

The Trump administration plans to announce the long-anticipated federal rule officially banning bump stocks in the coming days, according to US officials familiar with the matter.Bump stocks gained national attention last year after a gunman in Las Vegas rigged his weapons with the devices to fire on concertgoers, killing 58 people. President Donald Trump vowed to outlaw the devices soon after the tragedy, and some lawmakers on Capitol Hill urged him to back a permanent legislative fix.But opposition from lawmakers and the National Rifle Association ultimately made a regulatory change the only realistic path forward to accomplishing the President's goal.The devices make it easier to fire rounds from a semi-automatic weapon by harnessing the gun's recoil to "bump" the trigger faster -- an operation that caused officials at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives during the Obama administration to conclude that it's merely a gun accessory or firearm part, not subject to federal regulation.At Trump's direction, however, the Justice Department submitted a proposed final rule earlier this year that upended the Obama-era interpretation, and concluded that bump-fire stocks, "slide-fire" devices, and devices with certain similar characteristics all fall within the prohibition on machine guns by allowing a "shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger," and therefore, they are illegal under federal law.Under the new rule, bump stock owners would be required to destroy or surrender the devices to authorities. Members of the public will be given 90 days to turn in or otherwise discard their bump stocks, according to a source familiar with the final rule."Bump stocks turn semiautomatic guns into illegal machine guns. This final rule sends a clear message: Illegal guns have no place in a law-and-order society, and we will continue to vigorously enforce the law to keep these illegal weapons off the street," a senior Justice Department official told CNN Wednesday.Republican lawmakers, who are typically opposed to federal agencies writing regulations to accomplish what Congress hasn't directly legislated, had insisted that the Justice Department and ATF write a new regulation. Whereas some Democrats, such as Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, have repeatedly cautioned that such a ban would likely result in lawsuits given ATF's earlier interpretation.ATF Acting Director Thomas Brandon acknowledged in a Senate hearing this summer that he has been advised that banning bump fire stocks through executive regulation could lead to court challenges that would delay the implementation of a ban.Trump said last month he told the NRA "bump stocks are gone," but how the group responds to the final rule remains to be seen. A spokesperson for the NRA said in October 2017 that the ATF "should review bump-fire stocks to ensure they comply with federal law," but made clear it opposed the broader gun-control legislation raised by some in Congress.In June, Slide Fire Solutions, the Texas company that invented the bump-fire stock device and was its lead manufacturer, announced on its website that it would stop taking orders for its products and would shut down its website.The company, however, directs buyers to RW Arms, an arms dealer also based in Texas, which appears to be selling the remainder of Slide Fire's inventory. RW Arms was advertising for bump fire stocks made by Slide Fire as recently as this week, when they offered a Cyber Monday sale on the product. Slide Fire has not responded to repeated requests for comment about any potential litigation over a federal rule banning bump stocks.The-CNN-Wire 3725

The Walt Disney Co. is planning to lay off 28,000 workers in its theme parks division in California and Florida.The company has been squeezed by limits on attendance at its parks and other restrictions due to the pandemic. Officials said Tuesday that two-thirds of the planned layoffs involve part-time workers but they ranged from salaried employees to nonunion hourly workers.In addition to the 28,000 nonunion workers, Disney said it is discussing next steps with unionized cast members.Disney’s parks closed last spring as the pandemic started spreading in the U.S. The Florida parks reopened this summer, but the California parks have yet to reopen as the company awaits guidance from the state of California.Disney along with local officials, have pressured California officials to resume operations at Disneyland. Disneyland has been ordered to remain closed by California Gov. Gavin Newsom.Newsom said a month ago that he would have an announcement soon on plans to allow for a reopening of amusement parks in California, including Disneyland.“In light of the prolonged impact of COVID-19 on our business, including limited capacity due to physical distancing requirements and the continued uncertainty regarding the duration of the pandemic – exacerbated in California by the State’s unwillingness to lift restrictions that would allow Disneyland to reopen – we have made the very difficult decision to begin the process of reducing our workforce at our Parks, Experiences and Products segment at all levels, having kept non-working Cast Members on furlough since April, while paying healthcare benefits,” said Josh D’Amaro, Disney Parks chairman. “Approximately 28,000 domestic employees will be affected, of which about 67% are part-time. We are talking with impacted employees as well as to the unions on next steps for union-represented Cast Members.” 1872

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 Supreme Court ruled in favor of Booking.com Tuesday in a landmark trademark case.In an 8-1 decision, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that determined that Booking.com is not a generic trademark because the term held meaning with consumers.Justice Stephen Breyer, a liberal judge, was the lone dissenting opinion.Other businesses including Cars.com, Dictionary.com, Newspapers.com and Wine.com said the outcome in the case would affect their ability to trademark their names too. 503

The road to the White House clearly goes through the state of Michigan as both Joe Biden and Donald Trump have been actively campaigning in the state.Michigan has been a state hard-hit economically in recent years as the once thriving auto industry Nationally, the number of auto jobs has declined amid the pandemic. The auto industry has lost nearly 100,000 jobs this year.At the start of the century, there were more than 1.3 million US auto jobs. When Barack Obama took office, that number had dropped by 50%. During his tenure, the auto industry regained a portion of those jobs lost.But any gains from a revamped trade agreement had yet to be realized in the auto industry based on Bureau of Labor Statistics figures. On Thursday, Joe Biden said in an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper the new USMCA agreement that replaced NAFTA is an upgrade, but failed to give President Donald Trump for securing the agreement."But look what the overall trade policy has done even with NAFTA. We now have this gigantic deficit in trade with Mexico. Not because NAFTA wasn't made better, because overall trade policy and how he deals with it made everything worse," Biden said.Biden was asked whether Trump should be given credit for the USMCA. Biden said the Obama White House was unable to renegotiate NAFTA because of Congress. For the first two years of the Obama administration, both the House and Senate were held by Democrats.“Because we had a Republican Congress that wouldn't go along with us renegotiating,” Biden told Tapper.In 2008, both Biden and Obama campaigned on changing the US trade agreement between Mexico and Canada. The USMCA, which became effective this year, was amended by Congress, but ultimately won bipartisan support from leaders of both party.The interview with Tapper was taped in Michigan and aired hours before Trump held a campaign rally in the state.On Monday, Trump said, “Biden supported NAFTA. He supported China’s entry into the World Trade Organization. Two disasters. The most disastrous trade deals in history, both of them. I can’t tell you which was worse; they were both terrible.” 2125