濮阳东方医院看早泄收费低濮阳东方男科医院割包皮收费公开,濮阳东方妇科医院线上医生咨询,濮阳东方医院治早泄评价好专业,濮阳市东方医院口碑很好价格低,濮阳东方男科医院口碑好很放心,濮阳东方医院妇科医生怎么样,濮阳东方医院男科在线咨询

The Trump administration will no longer seek to automatically release pregnant immigrants from detention -- a move in line with the overall efforts by the administration to hold far more immigrants in custody than its predecessors.The change in policy was sent by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement to Congress on Thursday morning and obtained by CNN.According to the new directive, immigration officers will no longer default to trying to release pregnant women who fall into immigration custody, either because they are undocumented or otherwise subject to deportation. The Obama administration policy urged officers to presume a pregnant woman could be released except for extreme circumstances.But a FAQ sent with the directive makes clear that ICE is not going to detain all pregnant immigrants. The policy will require a case-by-case evaluation, the FAQ explains, and will keep in custody "only those whose detention is necessary to effectuate removal, as well as those deemed a flight risk or danger to the community."ICE will also lean towards releasing pregnant women if they are in their third trimester, and will also make an effort for detention facilities to provide services to pregnant women and parents.The move follows controversial efforts by the Department of Health and Human Services to keep unaccompanied minor immigrants in custody rather than releasing them to obtain abortions, a policy that has been the subject of intense litigation.The-CNN-Wire 1482

The World Health Organization updated its guidelines on mask-wearing Tuesday, recommending that anyone over the age of 12 wear a mask indoor and outdoor and inside your home if it's ventilated poorly.The updated guidelines come as COVID-19 cases continue to sore in America. On Wednesday, 180,083 new cases were reported, according to data from Johns Hopkins University.According to the guidelines, in areas where COVID is spreading, WHO recommends that anyone over the age of 12 wear masks in shops, shared workplaces, and schools if they can't maintain a distance of more than 3-feet between others.They also recommend masks be worn when people visit your home if there's not adequate ventilation, or you can't be more than 3-feet or more from each other.The WHO said on top of wearing a mask, other precautions such as washing hands, avoiding touching your face, having adequate ventilation if indoors, testing, contact tracing, quarantine, and isolation should also be taken."Together, these measures are critical to prevent human-to-human transmission of COVID-19," WHO said.In areas of COVID-19 spread, the organization said healthcare workers should take part in "universal masking" in health care facilities, meaning they should wear an N95 respirator mask throughout their entire shift, including when caring for other patients.The advice applied to visitors, outpatients, and common areas such as cafeterias and staff rooms, but added administrative staff does not need to wear a mask if they are not exposed to patients.The organization also recommended that people who do vigorous physical activity should not wear masks, citing some associated risks, particularly asthma.For children, the WHO recommends children up to 5-years-old should not wear masks for source control. They added that children between the ages of 6 to 11-years-old should only wear masks if "a risk-based approach is applied.""Factors to be considered in the risk-based approach include intensity of COVID-19 transmission, child’s capacity to comply with the appropriate use of masks and availability of appropriate adult supervision, local social and cultural environment, and specific settings such as households with elderly relatives, or schools," the organization added in its guidelines. 2285

The White House on Monday backed down from its threats to revoke Jim Acosta's press pass."Having received a formal reply from your counsel to our letter of November 16, we have made a final determination in this process: your hard pass is restored," the White House said in a new letter to Acosta. "Should you refuse to follow these rules in the future, we will take action in accordance with the rules set forth above. The President is aware of this decision and concurs."The letter detailed several new rules for reporter conduct at presidential press conferences, including "a single question" from each journalist. Follow-ups will only be permitted "at the discretion of the President or other White House officials."The decision reverses a Friday letter by the White House that said Acosta's press pass could be revoked again right after a temporary restraining order granted by a federal judge expires. That letter -- signed by two of the defendants in the suit, press secretary Sarah Sanders and deputy chief of staff for communications Bill Shine -- cited Acosta's conduct at President Trump's November 7 press conference, where he asked multiple follow-up questions and didn't give up the microphone right away."You failed to abide" by "basic, widely understood practices," the letter to Acosta claimed.CNN won the temporary restraining order earlier on Friday, forcing the White House to restore Acosta's press access for 14 days. Judge Timothy J. Kelly ruled on Fifth Amendment grounds, saying Acosta's right to due process had been violated. He did not rule on CNN's argument that the revocation of Acosta's press pass was a violation of his and the network's First Amendment rights.Many journalists have challenged the administration's actions against Acosta, pointing out that aggressive questioning is a tradition that dates back decades.But Trump appeared eager to advance an argument about White House press corps "decorum," no matter how hypocritical.Since the judge criticized the government for not following due process before banning Acosta on November 7, the letter looked like an effort to establish a paper trail that could empower the administration to boot Acosta again at the end of the month.The letter gave Acosta less than 48 hours to contest the "preliminary decision" and said a "final determination" would be made by Monday at 3 p.m.CNN's lawyers had signaled a willingness to settle after prevailing in court on Friday. Ted Boutrous, an attorney representing CNN and Acosta, said they would welcome "a resolution that makes the most sense so everyone can get out of court and get back to their work."But in a new court filing on Monday morning, CNN's lawyers said the defendants "did not respond to this offer to cooperate." Instead, the letter from Shine and Sanders was an "attempt to provide retroactive due process," the filing alleged.So CNN and Acosta asked the judge to set a schedule of deadlines for motions and hearings that would give the network the chance to win a preliminary injunction, a longer form of court-ordered protection to Acosta's press pass.They were seeking a hearing "for the week of November 26, 2018, or as soon thereafter as possible," according to the court filing.A preliminary injunction could be in effect for much longer than the temporary restraining order, thereby protecting Acosta's access to the White House.In a response Monday morning, government lawyers called the CNN motion a "self-styled 'emergency'" and sought to portray the White House's moves as a lawful next step."Far from constituting an 'emergency,' the White House's initiation of a process to consider suspending Mr. Acosta's hard pass is something this Court's Order anticipated," they said.The DOJ lawyers continued to say that the White House had made "no final determination" on Acosta's access, and asked the court to extend its own deadline, set last week, for a status report due at 3 p.m. Monday, in light of the White House's separate self-imposed deadline for the Acosta decision.At lunchtime, Kelly granted the government's request and extended the status report deadline to 6 p.m. Monday.The case was assigned to Judge Kelly when CNN filed suit last Tuesday. Kelly was appointed to the bench by Trump last year, and confirmed with bipartisan support in the Senate. He heard oral arguments on Wednesday and granted CNN's request for a temporary restraining order on Friday."We are disappointed with the district court's decision," the Justice Department said in response at the time. "The President has broad authority to regulate access to the White House, including to ensure fair and orderly White House events and press conferences. We look forward to continuing to defend the White House's lawful actions."Trump seemed to shrug off the loss, telling Fox's Chris Wallace in an interview that "it's not a big deal."He said the White House would "create rules and regulations for conduct" so that the administration can revoke press passes in the future."If he misbehaves," Trump said, apparently referring to Acosta, "we'll throw him out or we'll stop the news conference.""This is a high-risk confrontation for both sides," Mike Allen of Axios wrote in a Monday item about Trump's new targeting of Acosta. "It turns out that press access to the White House is grounded very much in tradition rather than in plain-letter law. So a court fight could result in a precedent that curtails freedom to cover the most powerful official in the world from the literal front row."The-CNN-Wire 5546

The U.S. government is investigating the Equifax breach.In an unusual move, the Federal Trade Commission confirmed on Thursday that it has opened a probe into the Equifax debacle, which may have compromised the personal information of as many as 143 million Americans."The FTC typically does not comment on ongoing investigations," Peter Kaplan, the FTC's acting director of public affairs, said in a statement. "However, in light of the intense public interest and the potential impact of this matter, I can confirm that FTC staff is investigating the Equifax data breach."A spokesperson for Equifax said the company is "actively engaging with and being responsive to regulators, federal agencies and legislators and expect to continue to do so in the future."The company's stock dropped another 8% in early trading Thursday following the FTC statement. The stock fell 15% on Wednesday on investor concerns of an impending investigation.The confirmation comes one day after Sen. Mark Warner sent a detailed letter to the acting head of the FTC calling for an investigation into Equifax's handling of the breach.In particular, Warner called for the agency to scrutinize Equifax for potential security lapses and its poor handling of customer service after the breach was disclosed.Earlier this week, a bipartisan group of dozens of senators also sent a letter urging the FTC, Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate Equifax over its executives' stock sales.Three Equifax executives sold shares of the credit-reporting firm worth nearly million shortly after the breach was discovered. The sales came before the breach was announced to the public.Equifax may not be the largest data breach ever in terms of the number of people affected, but it may be more significant because of the sensitive information at risk: social security numbers, addresses and the numbers of some driver's licenses.Maura Healey, the attorney general of Massachusetts, said this week she intends to file the first state lawsuit against Equifax over the breach.Jeb Hensarling, a Republican Congressman from Texas and the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said last Friday that preparations are already underway for a congressional hearing on the matter. 2361

The U.S. communications regulator on Tuesday proposed a 5 million fine, its largest ever, against two health insurance telemarketers for spamming people with 1 billion robocalls using fake phone numbers.The Federal Communications Commission said John Spiller and Jakob Mears made the calls through two businesses. State attorneys general of Arkansas, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas also sued the two men and their companies, Rising Eagle and JSquared Telecom, in federal court in Texas, where both men live, for violating the federal law governing telemarketing, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.The FCC said the robocalls offered plans from major insurers like Aetna and UnitedHealth with an automated message. If consumers pressed a button for more information, however, they were transferred to a call center that sold plans not connected to those companies. The FCC said the Missouri attorney general sued Rising Eagle’s largest client, Health Advisors of America, for telemarketing violations last year.Over more than four months in early 2019, the FCC said, these telemarketers faked the number their calls displayed in caller ID with intent to deceive consumers; purposefully called people who are on the Do Not Call list; and called people’s mobile phones without getting permission first.Consumers weren’t the only ones bothered. The telemarketers faked their calls to make them appear they came from other companies, which then received angry calls and were named in lawsuits from consumers. The FCC didn’t name these companies, but said one got so many calls that its phone network “became unusable.”The fine is not a final decision. Spiller and Mears will have a chance to respond.As robocalls became a pressing issue for consumers, both as an annoyance and as a vehicle for fraud, the FCC has pushed carriers to do more to stop them. A new law beefs up enforcement and mandates that the phone industry not charge for call-blocking tools and put in place a system designed to weed out “spoofed” calls made using fake numbers.Reached by phone at the number listed for JSquared, Spiller declined to comment. He declined to provide contact information for Mears and said neither would speak before talking to an attorney. 2275