濮阳东方医院做人流手术口碑怎么样濮阳东方看妇科很靠谱,濮阳东方医院看妇科病价格透明,濮阳东方医院男科收费公开,濮阳东方医院男科割包皮口碑很好放心,濮阳东方医院男科治早泄很靠谱,濮阳东方医院割包皮值得信赖,濮阳东方医院看早泄收费不高

Fake states "New California State" and "New Nevada State" have joined in on a lawsuit brought on by Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, looking to overturn the results of the 2020 election.According to Forbes, Chairman of the New Nevada State movement Robert E. Thomas III filed a 13-page amicus brief Friday.According to the brief, the pretend states are "directly impacted by the arbitrary and capricious changes in election laws and procedures occur with unfortunate regularity in the current States of California and Nevada.""New California State" and "New Nevada State" are movements seeking to form new states from rural counties who are trying to "stop the lawless actions" of the Democratic governors of Nevada and California, Forbes reported.According to USA Today, "New California" claimed its independence in 2018 in a bid to become the 51st state.The brief also alleges that the states took arbitrary actions to change voting laws without consulting their state legislature, which they say violates the Constitution.According to the Associated Press, 17 Republican attorney generals and 106 House Republicans have signed onto the case. 1165

Fake states "New California State" and "New Nevada State" have joined in on a lawsuit brought on by Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, looking to overturn the results of the 2020 election.According to Forbes, Chairman of the New Nevada State movement Robert E. Thomas III filed a 13-page amicus brief Friday.According to the brief, the pretend states are "directly impacted by the arbitrary and capricious changes in election laws and procedures occur with unfortunate regularity in the current States of California and Nevada.""New California State" and "New Nevada State" are movements seeking to form new states from rural counties who are trying to "stop the lawless actions" of the Democratic governors of Nevada and California, Forbes reported.According to USA Today, "New California" claimed its independence in 2018 in a bid to become the 51st state.The brief also alleges that the states took arbitrary actions to change voting laws without consulting their state legislature, which they say violates the Constitution.According to the Associated Press, 17 Republican attorney generals and 106 House Republicans have signed onto the case. 1165

ENCINITAS, Calif. (KGTV)- School leaders in a north county school district are trying to figure out how to address a legal petition filed by their teachers' union.The San Dieguito Union High School District Board of Trustees held an emergency closed-door meeting Tuesday at Earl Warren Middle School in Solana Beach.A few dozen students and some parents gathered outside the school to protest the district's plan to return to in-person instruction in January."Our teachers have taught us to stand up for what's right, and we see that the board is not listening to their needs, their concerns, they're putting their lives at risk, so we are here to support our teachers," said student Andrea Gately.Parent Julie Bronstein said distance learning is not ideal, but she doesn't think it's safe for kids to return when the virus is surging."Why can't we just wait a bit more, get ourselves out of the danger zone, get beyond the surge, make sure teachers are able to be vaccinated to the extent possible, and then reopen in a grander fashion," said Bronstein.Late last Tuesday night, the San Dieguito Union High School District Board of Trustees voted to give students the option to return to school one day a week on January 4th, then five days a week for in-person instruction on January 27th.Parents like Jane Woltman say students should have returned to class months ago."When they asked if kids wanted to go back full time in October, 80% of those parents said yes, yet we didn't go back then. We weren't in the purple tier then," said Woltman.Woltman has two kids at La Costa Canyon High School."I just think the social well being of kids is diminishing. Kids are losing engagement, and basically, this is a teaching model that was not intended to be long term," said Woltman.Friday, the California Teachers Association filed a legal petition on behalf of the local teachers' union to block the January return.Duncan Brown is a counselor at Diegueno Middle School and Oak Crest Middle School. He's also the president of the San Dieguito Faculty Association. He says the district's plan violates the governor's regional stay at home order."It goes against CDC guidelines, it goes against CDPH rules, most districts have reconsidered reopening plans, but San Dieguito continues to move forward," said Brown.Under the state's health mandate, schools that were already open for in-person instruction were allowed to stay open when the county fell back into the purple tier. The union is challenging the district's definition of what is considered an open school."All the instruction is done through small cohorts, and we believe the intent of the reopening plan was if grades were going through a reopening. For example, 9th and 10th grade were invited back, then under those kinds of understandings, 11th and 12th graders would be able to continue the reopening as well," said Brown.Parents who believe kids should be back in school say the union is just delaying things."I just think it's a stall tactic, and the union doesn't want to go back period. I don't think that's the voice of a lot of teachers who are afraid of ramifications if they speak up," said Woltman.The board president says the district's reopening plan follows the guidance issued by The California Department of Public Health and includes detailed protocols for distancing and ventilation.Teachers in high-risk groups for the virus or with childcare issues can continue teaching remotely until January 27th, but the district hasn't decided beyond that. 3529

Federal judge Timothy J. Kelly sided with CNN on Friday, ordering the White House to reinstate chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta's press pass.The ruling was an initial victory for CNN in its lawsuit against President Trump and several top aides.The lawsuit alleges that CNN and Acosta's First and Fifth Amendment rights are being violated by the suspension of Acosta's press pass.Kelly did not rule on the underlying case on Friday. But he granted CNN's request for a temporary restraining order.This result means that Acosta will have his access to the White House restored for at least a short period of time. The judge said while explaining his decision that he believes that CNN and Acosta are likely to prevail in the case overall.Kelly made his ruling on the basis of CNN and Acosta's Fifth Amendment claims, saying the White House did not provide Acosta with the due process required to legally revoke his press pass.He left open the possibility, however, that the White House could seek to revoke it again if it provided that due process, emphasizing the "very limited" nature of his ruling and saying he was not making a judgment on the First Amendment claims that CNN and Acosta have made.Kelly was appointed to the bench by Trump last year, and confirmed with bipartisan support in the Senate.CNN has also asked for "permanent relief," meaning a declaration from the judge that Trump's revocation of Acosta's press pass was unconstitutional. This legal conclusion could protect other reporters from retaliation by the administration."The revocation of Acosta's credentials is only the beginning," CNN's lawsuit alleged, pointing out that Trump has threatened to strip others' press passes too.That is one of the reasons why most of the country's major news organizations have backed CNN's lawsuit, turning this into an important test of press freedom.But the judge will rule on all of that later. Further hearings are likely to take place in the next few weeks, according to CNN's lawyers.The White House took the unprecedented step of suspending Acosta's access after he had a combative exchange with Trump at last week's post-midterms press conference. CNN privately sought a resolution for several days before filing suit on Tuesday.The defendants include Trump, press secretary Sarah Sanders, and chief of staff John Kelly.Kelly heard oral arguments from both sides on Wednesday afternoon.Kelly, a Trump appointee who has been on the federal bench just more than a year now, was very inquisitive at Wednesday's hearing, asking tough questions of both sides, drilling particularly deep into some of CNN's arguments.Then he said he would issue a ruling Thursday afternoon. He later postponed it until Friday morning, leaving both sides wondering about the reason for the delay.In public, the White House continued to argue that Acosta deserves to be blacklisted because he was too aggressive at the press conference.Speaking with Robert Costa at a Washington Post Live event on Thursday, White House communications official Mercedes Schlapp said press conferences have a "certain decorum," and suggested that Acosta violated that. "In that particular incident, we weren't going to tolerate the bad behavior of this one reporter," she said. Schlapp repeated the "bad behavior" claim several times.When Costa asked if the White House is considering yanking other press passes. Schlapp said "I'm not going to get into any internal deliberations that are happening."In court on Wednesday, Justice Department lawyer James Burnham argued that the Trump White House has the legal right to kick out any reporter at any time for any reason -- a position that is a dramatic break from decades of tradition.While responding to a hypothetical from Kelly, Burnham said that it would be perfectly legal for the White House to revoke a journalist's press pass if it didn't agree with their reporting. "As a matter of law... yes," he said.The White House Correspondents' Association -- which represents reporters from scores of different outlets -- said the government's stance is "wrong" and "dangerous.""Simply stated," the association's lawyers wrote in a brief on Thursday, "if the President were to have the absolute discretion to strip a correspondent of a hard pass, the chilling effect would be severe and the First Amendment protections afforded journalists to gather and report news on the activities on the President would be largely eviscerated."The-CNN-Wire 4484

ESCONDIDO, Calif. (KGTV/CNS) - CHP officers are investigating a crash in Escondido that left a driver with burns to about 80 percent of his body Wednesday morning.The 22-year-old driver, who police believe is a current or former Marine, hit a tree at Bear Valley Pkwy north of Eldorado Dr. at 2:45 a.m.The vehicle caught fire but emergency crews put out the flames. Neighbors who heard the crash also helped the driver.CHP officers initially believed the driver was dead inside the vehicle but found him alive when they put out the flames.The man was taken to UCSD Medical Center with burns and other severe injuries.The investigation closed Bear Valley Pkwy from Bear Valley Rd. to SR-78 during the morning commute.  750