哈密那家医院做阴道紧缩手术好(哈密尿道炎医院在哪) (今日更新中)

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 child had just moments to escape a carjacking when a thief jumped in the vehicle and sped off from a Detroit gas station, police say. According to Detroit Police, the female driver went inside the store to pay for gas. The suspect then entered the gold 2004 Pontiac Montana, and the 7-year-old girl barely managed to jump out of the minivan. Watch the surveillance video below: 402

A Dodge Charger abandoned after an accident. Officers arrested the driver for allegedly using stolen identities to buy cars and rent apartments. 153

A judge is temporarily barring the Department of Homeland Security from enforcing new asylum restrictions on two organizations.Judge Paula Xinis says that's because action Sec. Chad Wolf is likely in his role unlawfully.Dozens of states, cities and counties are suing over the new rules that make asylum seekers wait longer to get jobs.The Maryland judge's injunction applies only to two groups she say shave clear standing and proof of irreparable harm: CASA de Maryland and Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project.Previously, the government accountability office also determined that Wold was appointed as part of an invalid order of succession. 646

A disturbing trend is developing across the U.S. regarding vehicles striking Black Lives Matter protesters.Just since the grand jury announced its decision in the Breonna Taylor case on Wednesday, vehicles have driven through protests in at least three cities: Denver, Buffalo and Los Angeles.Wednesday night, hours after it was revealed that the police officers who shot the 26-year-old EMT would not be charged for her killing, a man drove his car through a crowd of demonstrators calling for justice outside the Colorado State Capitol in Denver. The driver was detained.That same night, a protester was struck by a truck in Buffalo’s Niagara Square, sending her to the hospital with broken bones. In that case, authorities have arrested the driver on charges of reckless endangerment and reckless driving.And most recently, multiple vehicles drove through a protest in Hollywood Thursday night, one of which struck and injured a person. That victim was transported to an area hospital with minor injuries, according to the Los Angeles Police Department.LAPD says a group of more than 300 protesters were marching near Sunset Boulevard when a blue pick-up truck maneuvered through the crowd and became involved in an altercation shortly after 9 p.m. As the driver of the truck attempted to get away from the situation, police say the vehicle struck a protester standing in the street.Moments later, police say a white Prius attempted to drive around the same protest and also became involved in an altercation with people in the crowd.“A black pick-up truck leading the protests accelerated and pinned that white Prius in, forcing it to come to a stop,” wrote police in a statement. “The driver of the Prius attempted to flee the area and reversed into a green mustang behind it. That vehicle was also participating in the protest.”Police say both the drivers of the truck and Mustang attempted to extract the driver of the Prius from the vehicle, but that driver was able to get away. Several blocks away, that motorist was detained by Hollywood officers, according to police.All the drivers and victims involved in both altercations have been identified by Hollywood officers and an investigation is ongoing.Protests are expected to continue throughout the coming days as people demand justice in the Breonna Taylor case.On Wednesday, the Kentucky grand jury indicted one of the three Louisville police officers who entered Taylor's apartment in March and fatally shot the emergency medical technician. However, the indicted officer isn’t being charged in connection with Taylor’s killing, he’s being charged with wanton endangerment for shots fired into her neighbor’s apartment. After the grand jury's charging decision was announced, the Kentucky attorney general held a press conference, during which he said the officers who shot Taylor were "justified" in their actions because they were responding to a shot fire by Taylor's boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, who has said that he believed the police were intruders. 3027

来源：资阳报