潮州白癜风治疗那里好(汕头治疗白癜风最新疗法) (今日更新中)

Four major pro sports leagues in America, which are all currently holding preseason or regular season contests, jointly announced on Monday that locker room access will be cut to anyone deemed "non-essential," which includes reporters.The decision to curtail access to journalists to the locker rooms will be effective on Tuesday. With health officials encouraging the public to engage in social distancing, the leagues said it was necessary to protect the health of players, team officials and the media. But the announcement garnered a concerned response from professional sports writers, who say that locker room access is vital to sports reporting. The leaders of the AP Sports Editors, the Baseball Writers of America Association and other sports journalism organizations issued a statement on Monday."We are intent on working with the leagues, teams and schools we cover to maintain safe work environments," the statement read. "We also must ensure the locker room access — which we have negotiated over decades — to players, coaches and staff is not unnecessarily limited in either the short or long term. We look forward to open communication with the leagues as, together, we deal with this serious health matter."The decision also comes as the NHL and NBA prepare for the end of the regular season and start of the postseason. The MLS just kicked off its season last week, and MLB will get underway with its regular season later this month. "After consultation with infectious disease and public health experts, and given the issues that can be associated with close contact in pre- and post-game settings, all team locker rooms and clubhouses will be open only to players and essential employees of teams and team facilities until further notice," the leagues' joint statement read. "Media access will be maintained in designated locations outside of the locker room and clubhouse setting. These changes will be effective beginning with tomorrow's games and practices." 1992

Hundreds of cities have put curfews in place because of the protests. That makes it so law enforcement can stop or arrest anyone on the street, but many protesters have ignored the restrictions. So, why do it? We spoke to an expert in policing who says it’s about separating those hiding in the crowd to incite violence and protecting demonstrators trying to have their voices heard.“It doesn't necessarily give power. It gives them the ability to contain better whatever it is that they need to contain,” said Dr. Maria Haberfeld, a professor of law, police science and criminal justice at John Jay College. “Whether it's rioting, whether it's looting, whether it's unlawful gathering of people.”Haberfeld says curfews have a history of controversy. They were used during the Jim Crow era against African Americans and against Japanese populations during World War II.Now, they're normally used for juveniles or during natural disasters like hurricanes. Haberfeld calls that the good use of curfews to protect the general population.Still, the ACLU has criticized curfews as unfair and unconstitutional, saying it gives police too much discretion over who to arrest. Haberfeld doesn't see it that way.“When a city's under siege, when a city's in danger of being burned and destroyed, that has nothing to do with unconstitutional,” said Haberfeld. “That has everything to do actually with serving and protecting people who live in the city.”Haberfeld says it's important to note that curfews are instituted by mayors or local governments, not by police chiefs or commissioners. She says police departments cannot and do not want to arrest everyone. 1660

Federal prosecutors have charged a man in connection with the death of Mac Miller, who was found dead after a drug overdose in September 2018.According to a press release from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, a federal criminal complaint unsealed Wednesday alleges that Cameron James Pettit supplied the late hip-hop artist, whose real name is Malcolm James McCormick, with counterfeit oxycodone pills containing fentanyl.Fentanyl has been increasingly tied to overdose deaths in recent years, 515

For the better part of three months, Greg Morrison has spent most of his waking moments searching for jobs. Last week, that search finally paid off for the 33-year-old TV producer, who lives in Los Angeles.Three months without a paycheck, though, hasn’t been easy.“Every time you slide your credit card to pay for groceries or write a rent check, there’s that voice in your head that knows it’s coming out of your savings,” Morrison said.As COVID-19 swept across the country earlier this year, it all but ceased production of most television shows in L.A. For Morrison, the realization came fairly quickly that this stretch of unemployment would last much longer than the typical few weeks he has between some jobs.He’s been surviving on the extra 0 that the federal government has added to unemployment benefits as part of the CARES Act, but even that has been hard to come by.“They are seven weeks behind on my unemployment payments,” he said. “I can’t get anyone on the phone. They say they’ve setup another line, but I can’t reach anyone.”But even with all the troubles he’s facing getting unemployment benefits, prospects are looking better for Morrison and some Americans who have found themselves out of work because of the virus, especially as some states begin easing their stay-at-home restrictions.“It’s a lot more promising than it was a few weeks ago,” said Morrison, who just accepted a new producing job that starts in June.Although he’s hesitant given the current situation with the pandemic, he’s also hopeful.“I’m happy to be one of the lucky ones right now,” he added.As for economists, many still believe recovering from the pandemic will not be like flipping a light switch back on.“It’ll be five years before a full recovery,” said David Parsley, who teaches economics at Vanderbilt University.But Parsley says jobs will slowly begin to return as more states open for business.“There’s always opportunities, but these opportunities will be for people who are skilled; people who are trained,” he said. 2039

Former President Jimmy Carter suggested Friday that a full investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election would show that Donald Trump didn't win the presidency."There's no doubt that the Russians did interfere in the election. And I think the interference, although not yet quantified, if fully investigated would show that Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf," Carter said at the Carter Center's retreat in Leesburg, Virginia.Asked if he believes Trump is an illegitimate president, Carter paused for a moment."Based on what I just said, which I can't retract," Carter said to audience laughter. 729

来源：资阳报