河北伊宁男科检查(伊宁男性医院治疗) (今日更新中)

Another federal judge has overruled the Trump administration's efforts to end a popular immigration program -- this time saying the government has to accept new applications.The ruling on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, however, won't take immediate effect, with the judge delaying the ruling for 90 days to allow the administration to make its case.Similar to the other rulings, Judge John Bates concluded that the wind-down of DACA was "arbitrary and capricious" because the Department of Homeland Security failed to "adequately explain its conclusion that the program was unlawful." The judge also accused the government of providing "meager legal reasoning" to support its decision.A George W. Bush appointee to the US District Court for the District of Columbia, Bates delayed the effect of his ruling "to allow the agency an opportunity to better explain its rescission."The DACA program, which protects young undocumented immigrants who came to the US as children, has already been resumed after President Donald Trump sought to end it in September, after two federal judges issued nationwide rulings to accept renewals of the two-year permits issued by the program and after the Supreme Court declined to circumvent the appeals process to overturn those decisions.But while the Department of Homeland Security has been processing renewal applications under those rulings, as the appeals make their way through the courts, Tuesday's ruling was the first to order the program to resume accepting new applications -- potentially opening the program to tens of thousands more immigrants than the roughly 700,000 currently protected.In September, the administration defended ending the program by saying it was likely to fall in the courts anyway, arguing a six-month wind-down of the program would be more orderly than a sudden end brought by the courts. No court has found DACA to be unconstitutional. 1944

Another nationwide retailer is filing for bankruptcy amidst the pandemic.Stein Mart filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protections Wednesday, citing the current situation in retail during the coronavirus pandemic.“The combined effects of a challenging retail environment coupled with the impact of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic have caused significant financial distress on our business,” said Hunt Hawkins, Chief Executive Officer of Stein Mart, Inc. in a statement from the company. “The Company lacks sufficient liquidity to continue operating in the ordinary course of business. I would like to thank all of our employees for their dedication and support.”Stein Mart says they expect to close most, if not all, of their 281 stores and they have launched a “store closing and liquidation process.” The first store opened in 1908 in Mississippi.The discount department store says they are looking at possibly selling their website and intellectual property during the Chapter 11 process.Stein Mart adds to the list of several retailer who have announced bankruptcy filings or closings, including Tuesday Morning, JCPenney, Sur La Table, Mens Warehouse, Ann Taylor and Lord & Taylor. 1199

Are Apple's glory days behind it? That's probably a stretch. But Wall Street clearly is getting more worried about the company's reliance on the iPhone to generate sales and profit at a time when demand for the newer phones appears to be subpar.Shares of Apple (AAPL) fell 3% Wednesday and that was one of the big reasons why the Dow, which includes Apple, fell 300 points. Apple's stock briefly dipped into bear market territory, meaning it was down more than 20% from its all-time high.The reason for the Apple slide? Several companies that produce chips and other components used in iPhones have all issued gloomy forecasts recently, citing sluggish demand for higher-end smartphones.Although none of these companies, which include Qorvo (QRVO), Lumentum (LITE), Japan Display and IQE, have named Apple as the source of their woes, they are all Apple suppliers.But it may not be time to throw in the towel on Apple just yet, even though some analysts are cutting their price targets and earnings estimates due to concerns about soft sales for the newer iPhone XR, iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max.Apple's stock is still up more than 10% this year, making it one of the better performers in the Dow. The company is still worth nearly 0 billion. It remains the most valuable company in the world.Apple also continues to pay a solid dividend that yields 1.5% -- and the company is likely to keep raising its dividend thanks to its cash stockpile of 7.1 billion.What's more, Apple's earnings are expected to increase by more than 13% this fiscal year and keep growing at about a 12% clip annually, on average, for the next few years.So predictions of an Apple iPocalypse, if you will, may be premature. But it does seem like the company needs a new product to get consumers and investors excited again.Perhaps Apple needs to take a cue from the movie "This Is Spinal Tap" and release a new iPhone that goes to eleven. But would it be the iPhone 11 or iPhone XI? 1969

As Americans protest racial inequality and the death of George Floyd and others at the hands of police, their pleas are being heard in the chambers of the U.S. Capitol. Both Democrats and Republicans have introduced legislation to reform policing in America, but they diverge on some issues.The far-reaching legislative proposal from Democrats, the Justice in Policing Act, would limit legal protections for police, create a national database of excessive-force encounters and ban police chokeholds, among other changes.Republicans say their bill, known as the Justice Act -- one of the most ambitious GOP policing proposals in years -- “will maintain the constitutionally-limited role the federal government plays in local law enforcement decisions while still effecting significant change.” It calls for an enhanced use-of-force database, restrictions on chokeholds and new commissions to study law enforcement and race.Here’s a side-by-side look at some proposals:POLICE MISCONDUCT & USE-OF-FORCE DATABASESMany officers who wind up involved in fatal shootings have a history of misconduct, including Derek Chauvin, the Minneapolis officer charged with murder in Floyd’s death. He had at least a dozen complaints made against him, according to records.But those records are often not made public, making it difficult to know if officers have such a record.President Donald Trump signed an executive order this week requiring the attorney general to create a database tracking terminations, criminal convictions and civil judgments against law enforcement officers for excessive use of force. It encourages participation by providing certain grants only to those agencies that submit the required information.— Democrats’ bill: Calls for a national registry including complaints, disciplinary records and termination records. It also would require states to report to the Justice Department any incident in which force is used against a civilian or law enforcement officer. The proposal would require the agencies to report the reason force was used and the national origin, sex, race, ethnicity, age, disability, English language proficiency and housing status of each civilian against whom a law enforcement officer used force.— Republicans’ bill: Would require state and local governments to report all use-of-force incidents that result in serious injuries or death to the FBI on an annual basis. Municipalities that fail to comply could see a reduction in federal funding.CHOKEHOLDSThere’s a notable difference. The Democrats’ bill would specifically ban the use of chokeholds and carotid holds at the federal level, while the Republican bill incentivizes police departments to ban the practice through grant funding. Trump’s executive order also encourages such bans through financial incentives.— Democrats’ bill: Would ban chokeholds and carotid holds and would condition law enforcement funding for state and local law enforcement agencies on establishing a law to prohibit the use of chokeholds and carotid holds.— Republicans’ bill: Would condition certain Justice Department funds on a police department having specific policies restricting the use of chokeholds, except in situations in which deadly force is authorized.NO-KNOCK WARRANTSThere has been a growing call to ban no-knock warrants since 26-year-old Breonna Taylor was killed in her Louisville, Kentucky, home by officers in March. Democrats have proposed a ban on the practice, typically executed in some of the most dangerous investigations conducted by police departments. A no-knock warrant, as its name implies, is an order from a judge that allows police to enter a home without ringing a doorbell or banging on the door. Critics have said the use has increased dramatically, and some departments use them routinely in cases that don’t merit such an exception.— Democrats’ bill: Would specifically ban no-knock warrants for all federal drug cases and would require local and state law enforcement agencies to prohibit their use to qualify for some federal funding. Oregon and Florida are the only states that have outlawed such warrants.— Republicans’ bill: GOP senators argue there is no conclusive data on how, why and how often no-knock search warrants are used and have proposed requiring state and local law enforcement agencies to report specific data to the Department of Justice each year. The department would then be required to make a public report.FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS LAW— Democrats’ bill: Would amend the federal civil rights law that governs police misconduct to no longer require prosecutors to prove that an officer’s actions were willful, a high burden of proof. The law would allow an officer to be charged for acting with reckless disregard for someone’s life, causing that person’s death.— Republicans’ bill: Would not amend that section of the law.QUALIFIED IMMUNITYPolice officers are generally not held personally liable for anything that happens on the job, including when someone dies. The concept of qualified immunity has long been a way to protect police from unnecessary lawsuits and to give them the freedom to police without fear of unnecessary retribution.— Democrats’ bill: Would amend federal misconduct statutes to make it easier for courts to find officers personally liable for the violation of civil rights. Officers might think twice before abusing their power, but it could make it more difficult to recruit police nationwide. It could also potentially lead to officers being held financially liable.— Republicans’ bill: They say this is a step too far. As an alternative, the lead senator on the bill, Tim Scott of South Carolina, has suggested a “decertification” process for officers involved in misconduct.The president’s executive order instructs the Justice Department to push local police departments to be certified. Under the order, Justice would ensure a department could only be credentialed if its use-of-force policies adhered to federal, state, and local laws.White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said Wednesday the qualified immunity provision in the House Democrats’ bill “is a total and complete nonstarter.” 6166

An executive action President Trump issued Saturday on the deferral of payroll taxes could put more money in your pocket soon. Much is still unknown about how the order will be implemented, but experts say to keep a few things in mind before making plans for that extra cash.1. It’s temporaryMany employees have a 6.2% Social Security tax withheld from their paychecks and remitted to the IRS on their behalf by their employer. “The executive order defers the withholding, deposit and payment of the tax,” says Matthew Keefer, a certified public accountant at Gorfine, Schiller & Gardyn in Owings Mills, Maryland. The deferral period runs from Sept. 1 through Dec. 31.2. You may not qualifyThe deferral is available only to employees whose pretax wages or compensation is generally less than ,000 biweekly, which works out to around 0,000 a year. And currently it doesn’t apply to people who are self-employed, notes Pete Isberg, vice president of government relations at human resources services firm ADP.3. The taxes are due eventually“This is a deferral of taxes, not a forgiveness of taxes,” says Michael Graetz, a tax law professor at Columbia University Law School in New York. “So at the end of the deferral period, all of those taxes will be owed unless Congress changes the law to say that they’re forgiven.”4. Consider setting the extra money aside for nowIf your employer stops withholding and you see a boost in your pay because of it, you might want to hang on to that cash for now, Keefer says. “Unless legislation is passed, the deferred tax from the executive order will be repaid in the future,” he says. Another option, Isberg adds, is to tell your employer to withhold additional money by filling out a new form W-4 at work.Of course, not all households can afford to set money aside these days. Still, if you need the money from this tax deferral now, don’t lose sight of the fact it could mean a tax bill later.5. Some employers may just keep withholding the tax anywayIt can take time for employers to revamp payroll systems, especially if they’re not using a payroll processing company, according to Isberg. Also, employers can be liable for employment taxes, even if they don’t withhold them, he says. “Employers know that, and they’re going to realize that, ‘Look, if I do this, could the IRS come back to me in January and just assess the full amount that should have been withheld?’ Well, technically they can,” Isberg explains.Most employers won’t want to ask their employees to repay four months of taxes, Graetz adds. “This turns out to be a very complicated problem,” he says.More From NerdWalletSome Taxpayers Face a Desperate Wait for IRS RefundsHow to Work Around Delays in Major IRS FunctionsIRS Data: Refunds Lag as Agency, Tax Filers Slow DownTina Orem is a writer at NerdWallet. Email: torem@nerdwallet.com. 2862

来源：资阳报