濮阳东方妇科医院技术权威濮阳东方医院妇科做人流贵吗,濮阳东方医院男科治早泄价格便宜,濮阳东方医院看男科收费比较低,濮阳东方妇科医院治病便宜,濮阳东方医院治疗早泄口碑很不错,濮阳东方医院男科割包皮收费标准,濮阳东方妇科咨询大夫

The South Carolina Education Lottery reported on its website early Wednesday morning that one winning ticket was sold in its state.Mega Millions announced the win in a statement early Wednesday."The moment we've been waiting for finally arrived, and we couldn't be more excited," said Gordon Medenica, lead director of the Mega Millions Group and Director of Maryland Lottery and Gaming. "This is truly a historic occasion. We're so happy for the winner, and we know the South Carolina Education Lottery can't wait to meet the lucky ticket holder."The Mega Millions jackpot on Tuesday reached .573 billion, the game's largest-ever grand prize but not quite the nation's biggest prize of all time. A Powerball prize in 2016 was for .586 billion. The winning numbers on Tuesday were:28-70-5-62-65 and the Mega Ball was 5.Had a winning ticket not been sold on Tuesday, Friday's jackpot would have reached billion. Winning Tuesday's entire jackpot means either taking the .6 billion winnings in annuity payments spread over 29 years, or taking the lump sum of 3 million.  1112

The storm-weary Carolinas are preparing for another round of strong winds and drenching rains -- this time from Hurricane Michael.Michael is speeding toward the Florida Panhandle as a Category 4 storm, and is expected to make landfall Wednesday afternoon.From there, it'll move into the Southeast and some areas in North and South Carolina, where it's expected to bring strong wind gusts and drop 3 to 5 inches of rain when it passes central parts of the states Thursday and Friday, CNN meteorologist Michael Guy said.While it doesn't sound like much compared to last month's record Florence rainfall of 30 inches or more in some areas, any amount of rainfall on already saturated grounds could lead to flooding.Northeast South Carolina, from Columbia toward Myrtle Beach, and southeast North Carolina, were among the areas hardest hit by Florence, and will get a drenching from the latest hurricane, Guy said. While the rain will move quickly compared to Florence, it'll still bring flooding possibilities. 1015

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Monday to take up a case concerning the government's decision to phase out an Obama-era initiative that protects from deportation young undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children.In doing so, government lawyers sought to bypass federal appeals courts that have yet to rule definitively on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.In court papers, Solicitor General Noel Francisco asked the justices to take up the case this term and argued that district judges who had issued opinions against the administration were "wrong" to do so. Francisco pointed out that back in 2012 the Obama administration allowed some "700,000 aliens to remain in the United States even though existing laws provided them no ability to do so."Francisco said that "after a change in administrations" the Department of Homeland Security ended the policy "based on serious doubts about its legality and the practical implications of maintaining it."The filing came the night before the midterm elections as President Donald Trump has repeatedly brought up immigration to rally his base in the final hours before the vote.In September 2017, the government announced plans to phase out the program, but lower court judges blocked the administration from doing so and ordered that renewals of protections for recipients continue until the appeals are resolved.The legality of the program is not at issue in the case. Instead, lower courts are examining how the government chose to wind it down.Supporters of the roughly 700,000 young immigrants who could be affected by the end of DACA say the administration's actions were arbitrary and in violation of federal law. 1736

The Rev. Al Sharpton vowed to press for justice as he delivered the eulogy Thursday for Stephon Clark, an unarmed African-American man shot dead by Sacramento police.The sanctuary at Bayside of South Sacramento Church overflowed with people, so many sat outside as the funeral for the 22-year-old Clark took place."We will never let you forget the name of Stephon Clark until we get justice," Sharpton told mourners.Sharpton spoke into the microphone while being hugged by Clark's brother Stevante, who had just interrupted the service with an emotional plea to never forget his brother.Police fatally shot Stephon Clark in his grandmother's backyard on March 18, leading to days of protests. Police said they thought Clark had a gun, but only his cellphone was found at the scene. 789

The Supreme Court appears deeply divided about whether it can address partisan gerrymandering and come up with a standard to decide when politicians go too far in using politics to draw congressional districts that benefit one party over another.Hearing a case on Wednesday challenging a district in Maryland, several of the justices suggested that the issue could be addressed by the courts, but grappled with how to devise a manageable standard to govern future legislative maps.How the court rules could dramatically impact future races, as Democrats try to win back the House amid widespread unhappiness at President Donald Trump. Recently a state court in Pennsylvania redrew congressional districts there, possibly serving to erase the Republicans' 12-6 district advantage.Wednesday's case was brought by a group of Republican voters in Maryland who say Democrats went too far in redrawing districts after the last census.At one point during their one hour of oral arguments, Justice Stephen Breyer wondered whether the court should take the two challenges it has already heard dealing with maps in Wisconsin and Maryland, and another case out of North Carolina and hold arguments again next fall.The suggestion could have interesting implications if Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has been considering retirement and could be a key vote in the case, were to step down at the end of this term.On the issue of partisan gerrymandering, Breyer acknowledged that there seemed like "a pretty clear violation of the Constitution in some form" but he worried that the court needed a "practical remedy" so that judges would not have to get involved in "dozens and dozens and dozens of very important political decisions."Justice Elena Kagan pointed to the case at hand and said that Democrats had gone "too far" and took a "safe" Republican district and made it into a "pretty safe one" for Democrats. She referenced a deposition that then Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley gave where he said his intent was to create a map "that all things being legal and equal, would nonetheless be more likely to elect more Democrats rather than less."Kagan asked a lawyer for Maryland, "How much more evidence of partisan intent could we need?"Breyer seemed to urge his more conservative colleagues to step in, for the first time, and devise a framework for how to address gerrymandering.Pointing to the particular facts in the case he said, "We will never have such a record again.""What do we do, just say goodbye... forget it," Breyer asked.The challengers say former Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley led the charge to redraw the lines to unseat long-time GOP incumbent Rep. Roscoe Bartlett. They argue that Democrats diluted the votes of Republicans in the district by moving them to another district that had a safe margin for Democrats.In 2010, Bartlett won his district with by 28 percentage points, but he lost after the new maps were drawn in 2012 by 21 percentage points.But Justice Samuel Alito seemed to be on the other side of the spectrum and said, "Hasn't this Court said time and again you can't take all consideration of partisan advantage out of redistricting?"Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose vote could be critical, did not tip his hand but indicated that the current map, no matter what happens in the court, would have to be used in the next cycle.While the Supreme Court has a standard limiting the overreliance on race in map drawing except under the most limited circumstances, it has never been successful in developing a test concerning political gerrymandering. If the justices do come up with a standard, it could reshape the political landscape.In court, Michael Kimberly, a lawyer for the challengers, said that the Democratic politicians violated the free speech rights of voters by retaliating against them based on their party registration and prior voting history.He said that government officials may not "single out" a voter based on the votes he cast before.Maryland Solicitor General Steven Sullivan defended the map and suggested that the courts should stay out of an issue that is "inherently political." He argued that if the challengers prevail in their First Amendment challenge, it will mean that any partisan motive by political players would constitutionally doom all district maps.Justice Neil Gorsuch, appearing to agree with Sullivan, noted that the maps had been approved by the legislature.The challengers suffered a setback in the lower court when a special three-judge panel of federal judges refused to issue a preliminary injunction.Last year, the Supreme Court heard a similar political gerrymandering case in Wisconsin.That case was a statewide challenge brought by Democratic challengers to Republican-drawn state legislative maps. Challengers rely on both the First Amendment charge and say the maps violated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment.It is unclear why the Supreme Court added the Maryland case to the docket after hearing arguments in the Wisconsin case. 5026