济南治疗痛风病哪家医院好山东治疗痛风大概多少费用,济南痛风石滑动的吗,北京长期痛风会引发肿瘤吗,济南痛风结石是硬的吗,山东痛风怎么迅速缓解,山东得了痛风石该怎么办,济南尿液尿酸的正常值范围

The Temple University Board of Trustees decided Friday to rescind the honorary degree it gave to Bill Cosby, one of its most famous alums and a former trustee.In a three-sentence statement, the university said the decision was due to his conviction Thursday on three counts of aggravated indecent assault."In 1991, based on his career achievements, Temple awarded an honorary degree to William Cosby," the statement said. "Yesterday, Dr. Cosby was found guilty by a jury of the felony of aggravated sexual assault. Today the Temple University Board of Trustees has accepted the recommendation of the University to rescind the honorary degree."Cosby graduated from Temple and had been on the Board of Trustees for 32 years until he resigned in 2014 amid accusations that he sexually assaulted dozens of women over decades."I have always been proud of my association with Temple University," Cosby said in a statement released by the university at the time. "I have always wanted to do what would be in the best interests of the university and its students. As a result, I have tendered my resignation from the Temple University Board of Trustees."Through his powerful role at Temple, he met Andrea Constand, who worked for the university's women's basketball team. Cosby was found guilty of drugging and assaulting Constand at his home outside Philadelphia in January 2004.The-CNN-Wire 1392

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

The Trump administration has closed the Washington Monument because of a recent visit by Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, who tested positive this week for the coronavirus. Interior spokesman Nicholas Goodwin says a couple of monument workers were quarantined as a result of Bernhardt's visit, forcing a staffing shortage and the monument's closure. The Interior Department announced Bernhardt's positive test result for the coronavirus on Wednesday. An advocacy group for parks criticized Bernhardt, saying he had failed to safeguard park employees overall during the pandemic. Goodwin said the interior secretary wore a mask and followed other health guidelines throughout the visit.According to USA Today, Goodwin plans to reopen the monument on Dec. 21. 768

The Supreme Court decided on Monday that they will not reexamine a doctrine that protects law enforcement and government officials from being sued over their actions while on the job.The doctrine, which the justices created nearly 50 years ago, gives "qualified immunity" for law enforcement officers, which protects them from frivolous lawsuits CNN reported.The decision comes amid protests over the death of George Floyd, who died while in police custody in Minneapolis.According to CBS News, the courts were to hear one case about a man in Tennessee that was bitten by a police dog, although he was sitting on the ground with his hands raised.NPR reports that two justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Clarence Thomas, have both been skeptical of the doctrine. 763

The White House declined to comment Friday about a purported remark about Sen. John McCain by a communications staffer."I'm not going to comment on an internal staff meeting," press secretary Sarah Sanders said of Kelly Sadler's remark that McCain, who is being treated for brain cancer, is "dying."Sanders confirmed Sadler still works at the White House.On Thursday, Sadler, a special assistant who handles surrogate communications, told other staffers that McCain's opposition to President Donald Trump's CIA director nominee, Gina Haspel, does not matter because "he's dying anyway," a White House official told CNN. 627