濮阳东方妇科咨询大夫(濮阳东方医院男科看阳痿技术值得放心) (今日更新中)

It has been a political dream for Democrats for years: Turning Texas, and its 38 Electoral College votes, blue. Could 2020 be the year that such a progressive dream becomes a reality?THE POLLSPolls suggest a close race. Real Clear Politics, which averages recent polls, puts President Donald Trump up by just 0.2% in Texas. A CBS News poll from early July found presumptive Democratic Nominee Joe Biden trailing by just 1 point in the state. Trump won Texas by more than 800,000 votes in 2016. RECENT MOVESOn Monday, Biden announced the hiring of six staffers in the state, including senior advisers, a state director and a communications director. Not every state has a team in place, so the move suggests Team Biden believes it can force Trump to campaign more in Texas. Biden has also launched digital ads in recent days commemorating the Walmart shooting in El Paso one year ago. Trump, for his part, visited Texas last week and tweeted about Texas several times. 979

It is yet unknown what time Thursday White House staff learned that Hope Hicks, a senior advisor to President Donald Trump, tested positive for COVID-19. However, there are reports she had symptoms Wednesday night and attempts were made to quarantine her from staff.Here is a look at Trump’s movements Thursday and people he may have come into contact with.President Trump attended a fundraiser at his golf club in Bedminster, it is not known exactly how many people attended. He and close aides left the White House Thursday afternoon without talking to the media.The president also participated in a roundtable event, coming into close contact with dozens of people, including campaign supporters.The president did not wear a mask Thursday at the events at his golf course or on the plane, according to the Washington Post.He was tested after he returned to the White House late Thursday night. He did not talk to the media when he returned to Washington.Thursday night the president spoke to Fox News host Sean Hannity by phone and tweeted statements about he and the First Lady's positive results. Hicks showed symptoms following a Trump campaign rally in Minnesota Wednesday night, according to CNN and other media. She had spent time that day with the president and other presidential advisors, then flew to the rally together on Air Force One. Multiple reports state Hicks was quarantined on the plane back to Washington, D.C. and deplaned by the rear steps. So far, close aides, Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and the Vice President and Second Lady have all tested negative for the coronavirus.However, the president’s diagnosis is likely to raise questions about the rapid testing system at the White House, which is known to have a lower accuracy rate than more intrusive COVID-19 tests.The president is expected to conduct official and political events from the residence — including a call on Friday with senior citizens about the coronavirus. 1960

It may not be as oft-quoted as the First Amendment or as contested as the Second Amendment, but the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution plays a critical role in supporting some of our closest-held notions of American freedom and equality.For one, it clearly states that American citizenship is a birthright for all people who are born on American soil -- something that President Donald Trump has announced he wants to end. Not only would this unravel 150 years of American law, it would loosen a significant cornerstone of the Constitution's interpretation of American identity.In order to better understand this part of the 14th Amendment, we asked two experts in constitutional and immigration law to walk us through the first section. The amendment has five sections, but we will only be dealing with the first, which contains the Citizenship Clause and three other related clauses.But first, some historyThe 14th Amendment is known as a Reconstruction amendment, because it was added to the Constitution after the Civil War in 1868. That places it at an important historical crossroads, when lingering wounds of divisiveness and animosity still plagued the nation and the reality of a post-slavery America begged contentious racial and social questions."Thomas Jefferson said men were created equal, but the original Constitution betrayed that promise by allowing for slavery," says Jeffrey Rosen. "The 13th, 14th and 15th amendments were designed to enshrine Lincoln's promise of a new America."However, as so often is the case, this reaffirmed American ideal fell short of reality. Rosen notes that issues of civil rights and equal treatment continued to be denied to African Americans, LGBT people and other citizens for more than a century after the amendment's ratification.And Erika Lee points out that Native Americans weren't even allowed to become citizens until 1925."Even as [these amendments] were written, obviously there were major built-in inequalities and maybe at the time weren't intended to apply to everyone," Lee says.Why was citizenship by birthright such an important concept?"Citizenship was a central question left open by the original Constitution," says Rosen. "At the time it was written, the Constitution assumed citizenship, but it didn't provide any rules for it. In the infamous Dred Scott decision, the Chief Justice said African Americans can't be citizens of the US and 'had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.'"The US Supreme Court's ruling in the Dred Scott case, named for a slave who unsuccessfully sued for his freedom, has since been widely condemned.READ MORE: Scott v. Sandford"The 14th Amendment was designed to overturn this decision and define citizenship once and for all, and it was based on birthright," Rosen says. "It is really important that it's a vision of citizenship based on land rather than blood. It is an idea that anyone can be an American if they commit themselves to our Constitutional values."What does it mean to be "subject to the jurisdiction thereof?"According to Rosen, this is one of the greatest questions of citizenship. There are two clear examples of people not subject to the jurisdictions of the United States: diplomats and their children, and -- at the time of the 14th Amendment -- Native Americans, who were not recognized as part of the American populace."With those two exceptions, everyone who was physically present in the United States was thought to be under its jurisdiction," Rosen says. "There are numerous Supreme Court cases that reaffirm that understanding, and almost as importantly, there are lots of congressional statutes that assume birthright citizenship."Some scholars, like John Eastman of the Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, have argued that children of illegal immigrants are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the US and thus should not be considered citizens under the Constitution.But Rosen says this is a minority view among constitutional scholars of all political backgrounds."While the Supreme Court has not explicitly ruled [on the instance of children of illegal immigrants], Congress has passed all kinds of laws presuming their citizenship," Rosen says.What is the connection between birthright citizenship and immigration?In 1898, 30 years after the 14th Amendment was adopted, the Supreme Court reached a defining decision in a case known as the United States v. Wong Kim Ark. Lee explains that Wong Kim Ark was the American-born son of Chinese immigrants."Asian immigrants were the first immigrants to the US that couldn't be considered white," Lee says. "So they are treated differently. They are taxed differently, they are stripped of many rights. In the 1880s, they are excluded from immigration and barred from citizenship."READ MORE: The United States v. Wong Kim ArkSo, the main question of the case was, could a person born in America be a citizen in a place where his parents could not be as well? The Supreme Court decided yes, and the case remains the first defining legal decision made under the banner of birthright citizenship."[The Supreme Court's decision] said that the right of citizenship is not a matter of inheritance, that it never descends from generation to generation, it is related to where you're born," Lee says. "It's about the power of place. That has been a very expansive, and at the time, a corrective measure to a more exclusionary definition both legally as well as culturally as to what an American is."Why must it be stated that the privileges of citizenship need to be protected?Before the Civil War, states didn't necessarily have to follow the provisions stated in the Bill of Rights; only Congress had to. The 14th Amendment changed that."This second sentence of the Amendment means that states have to respect the Bill of Rights as well as basic civil rights and the rights that come along with citizenship," Rosen says. "The idea was that there were rights that were so basic; so integral to citizenship that they could not be narrowed by the states."Despite the promises and protections of citizenship, Lee says it is abundantly clear that different racial groups were, and often are, seen as unable or unworthy to function as true American citizens. After all, basic rights of citizenship, like suffrage and equal treatment, were denied certain racial groups for a hundred years after the 14th Amendment."The idea of a law applying to 'all people' seems to be clear. But in reality, the debate and the laws and practices that get established are very much based on a hierarchy of, well sure, all persons, but some are more fit and some are more deserving than others," she says.Throughout history, Asian immigrants, Mexican immigrants, Muslim immigrants and their children, to name a few, have had unspoken cultural caveats applied to their ability to be Americans."For Asian immigrants, the racial argument at the time was that 'It didn't matter whether one were born in the US or not, Asians as a race, are unassimilable. They are diametrically opposite from us Americans,'" Lee says."That was the argument that was used to intern Japanese citizens. It was the denial of citizenship in favor of race: 'The ability to become American, the ability to assimilate, they just didn't have it.'"Why was it important to legalize rights for non-citizens?So far, we've covered the first clause, the Citizenship Clause, and the second, the Privileges and Immunities Clause. These both deal with American citizens.The final two clauses, the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection clause, are a little different, and deal with the rights of all people in the United States.Eagle-eyed Constitution readers will notice that the 14th Amendment contains a "due process" clause very similar to the Fifth Amendment. This, says Rosen, was a technical addition to ensure the Fifth Amendment wasn't theoretically narrowed down to protect only American citizens."The 14th Amendment distinguishes between the privileges of citizenship and the privileges of all people," Rosen says. "The framers [of the amendment] thought there were certain rights that were so important that they should be extended to all persons, and in order to specify that they needed a new 'due process' clause."What does it mean to have 'equal protection of the laws'?"At the time following the Civil War, at its core, it meant all persons had the right to be protected by the police, that the laws of the country should protect all people," Rosen says. "In the 20th century, more broader questions were litigated under the 14th Amendment, like Brown v. Board of Education -- whether segregation was constitutional. Cases involving the internment of Japanese citizens, case from the marriage equality decisions, even Roe vs. Wade have strains of equal protection language and invoke due process law."READ MORE: Brown v. Board of EducationAnother interesting case that speaks directly to the immigration side of the 14th Amendment debate is the 1982 case of Plyler v. Doe, in which the Supreme Court ruled it was unconstitutional for the state of Texas to deny funding for undocumented immigrant children.READ MORE: Plyler v. DoeWhy are we talking about all this right now?This week,?Trump vowed to end the right to citizenship for the children of non-citizens and unauthorized immigrants born on US soil.But his interest in repealing birthright citizenship isn't a new idea. Lee says for the last 30 years or so, there have been several overtures by the political right to explore "citizenship reform," a timeline that she says aligns with the ascendancy of modern American conservatism.Lee fears if the current push to end birthright citizenship is successful, it could have wider implications than most people assume. People from other countries who are here legally on work or student visas, for instance, could have children who do not legally belong to the only country they know."There have been attempts since the 1990s to break away birthright citizenship, or narrow it down, and it did not seem that they would have a chance at succeeding until now," she says."To me this not only reflects the ascendancy of an extreme right position but also a return to a very narrow and exclusionary definition of Americanness." 10356

It’s a simple message: “Count every vote."It's what a crowd in Pennsylvania is chanting, as officials continue counting ballots in the battleground state. For Kierstyn Zolfo, it’s a personal one.“We believe that every vote needs to be counted,” she said. “I voted by mail-in, and I do that regularly anyway because I have disability issues.”Her mobility may be limited, but her voice--and those of others in this crowd--are not. Just 30 miles north of Philadelphia, in the all-important suburbs and outside the Bucks County Elections Office, residents rallied.“We're also here to celebrate that we're outside of the place that the votes were being counted,” said Marlene Pray, who organized the rally.It’s an effort called Protect The Vote. They are pushing to make sure every vote in the state, no matter the party affiliation, gets counted.“It's a completely nonpartisan effort. We just want to make sure that every vote gets counted,” said Bob Edwards with Protect The Vote. “I mean, what could be more simple and what more American than that?”Yet, the Trump campaign is suing Pennsylvania on several legal fronts, hoping to block certain mail-in votes, votes that the Pennsylvania Secretary of State said were legally cast by the millions there in the largest numbers ever seen in the state.The potential for multiple legal challenges here in Pennsylvania looms large, especially for ballots received after Election Day, which by state law, can still be counted if they were postmarked on Election Day and are delivered to elections offices by Friday.“This is profoundly important,” Pray said.It is something Kierstyn Zolfo sees, as well.“This is about American principles,” she said, “counting every vote.” 1719

It was a meeting of the mutual admiration society.The man who stopped a mass shooting at a Waffle House met Saturday with Parkland, Florida, students who want to prevent mass shootings everywhere.James Shaw Jr., hailed as a hero for wrestling a gun from a shooter at a Nashville-area Waffle House last month, tweeted photos of his meeting Saturday with survivors of February's mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School."Meeting the young adults of the Parkland incident so much fire and inspiration in their eyes was a great joy," Shaw tweeted after the breakfast meeting in Florida. "I met one of my heros today." 634

来源：资阳报