山东脚痛风怎样快速止痛山东痛风哪看的好,济南痛风石侵蚀骨头,济南尿酸高多吃什么,济南痛风蒜能吃吗,济南雪莲果痛风能不能吃,山东痛风急性发作几天缓解,济南痛风能吃板栗吗

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

In the midst of an economic downtown, small businesses had to figure out how to stay afloat. The website fundBLACKfounders launched earlier this year, and is providing a platform to help small businesses that are in need, or are looking to launch.“We offer a boutique movie-going entertainment experience,” Kendra Tucker explained. She helps run Next Act Entertainment. The idea for the Maryland business started in 2018, in part with co-owner Anthony Fykes.“2019 we opened up the theater. We took up a 1938 Art Deco theater right outside of Baltimore,” Fykes explained. “And we basically renovated it.”Then COVID-19 hit, forcing businesses like movie theaters to close temporarily.“During this time we knew that we just needed to survive as most small businesses do, and we had a lot of guests that were asking us about, How can we support you?'” Fykes said.For some businesses, closures weren’t temporary. A study out of Stanford University showed the drop in business owners from February to April 2020 was the largest on record, and black-owned businesses saw a 41 percent drop.So Fykes looked for help. “I basically just did a Google search and I found Renee, and the platform looked legit,” he said.He had come across fundBLACKfounders, a crowdfunding platform.“We were super nervous at first around even doing something like this. We were like, how are we going to be perceived, are our guests going to think we’re going belly up?,” Fykes said.“What I noticed with crowdfunding is that not a lot of African Americans were using it for ownership or for building businesses or startups,” Renee King said. She started fundBLACKfounders. She said anyone can start a campaign on the platform -- but unlike other crowdfunding sites, fundBLACKfounders coaches businesses through the process, and gives founders flexibility. The platform takes five percent commission on funds earned.“They can raise or lower their goal amount,” King explained. “As the money starts to come in and our merchant account clears it, the money goes straight to the founder.”“Starting in the end of January 2020 through now, we’ve raised over ,000…for 12 black entrepreneurs,” she said.For Next Act, the platform provided a way for the community to help.“It’s success is really built on the strength of the community that supports it, and fundBLACKfounders, it matches the type of strength and support that we get from our community,” Tucker said.For other companies like Saraa Green’s startup, the platform gives her a way to get an idea going. “We initially wanted to raise capital for our business to bring our tool out into the market,” she said.Her product is called The Braid Releaser. “My mom had to take out our braids and take down our braids and that would take hours, and the tools that she was currently using really wasn't doing its job,” Green explained. “She wanted to create a tool that would decrease the time in taking down braids, that is comfortable to use, and that essentially reduces the hair loss during the process.”That’s when she met Renee King. “I did not want my mother's dream to just come to an end because of this pandemic,” Green said.Nearly eight in 10 small businesses are now fully or partially open as of June, according to a poll by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.“What's good is this is actually helping us think through how do we flex into the entertainment part of our business,” Tucker said. Next Act has expanded to become a broader entertainment space, and is even being used for private events to help stay in business.As fundBLACKfounders grows, King wants the platform to help connect businesses to their communities.“We need to start helping black entrepreneurs a little bit more, and getting them more funding so that they can scale the solutions they need for their communities or they need for the world in general,” King said. 3864

In the wake of Omarosa Manigault Newman's departure from the West Wing in December and recent tell-all book rollout replete with accusations of racism, a senior White House official was asked simply: Who is the most senior black aide on President Donald Trump's staff?After an awkward delay, the answer from Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the President, was "Ja'Ron."It would fall to recently departed White House aide Marc Short later in the Sunday morning broadcast to provide the full name for the staffer she was referencing: Ja'Ron Smith, special assistant to the President for Domestic Policy.The episode thrust Smith into the spotlight as the White House faced questions about its interest and commitment to diversity. None of the 48 assistants and deputy assistants to the President are black.Hired in 2017 to serve as an adviser to Trump on Urban Affairs and Revitalization, Smith was tasked with pursuing Trump's agenda on a slate of issues important to the black community, including prison reform and historically black colleges and universities."There were a lot of people who were upset that he joined the administration because they felt he had turned his back on the community that he said he wanted to help," said one Republican close to the White House.It is a challenging assignment: Trump entered the White House having only won 8% of the black vote. The President has also antagonized black Americans by claiming that there were good people on "both" sides of a deadly rally in Charlottesville held by White supremacists and Nazis and his prolonged criticism over protests of racial injustice by NFL players.Most recently, Manigualt Newman's book about her time working for Trump, she has resurrected rumors of an alleged tape of Trump saying the "N-word" during a taping of NBC's "The Apprentice," the reality television show that made both of them household names.The White House did not make Smith available for comment. 1967

It's the day that many Las Vegas oddsmakers have been waiting for.On May 14, the United States Supreme Court overturned a decades-long prohibition of sports betting.Until Monday, there was only a handful of states that were allowed to accept sports bets and Nevada and its sportsbook was the mecca for sports gamblers.But even with the possibility of new sportsbooks, Las Vegas bookies are saying "bring it on.""Personally, I am very happy. I've been waiting for this day for 35 years," said Jimmy Viccaro at the South Point sportsbook.RELATED: Supreme Court opens door for legalized sports bettingThe Supreme Court's decision means that Nevada sportsbook can expand across state lines and create more Las Vegas-style sportsbooks."The real winners here are the customers and sports fans in the state governments," said Joe Asher, CEO of Las Vegas-based William Hill.Asher said their stock jumped after the announcement. So did the stock for Caesars and others.William Hill has already built a sportsbook in New Jersey, just waiting for this new era in sports betting.For years, Asher said sports betting has been happening in back rooms and under the table outside of Nevada.RELATED: Where can I legally?bet on sports?Now, the sports betting black market is facing regulation and taxation.Several major league sports are also chiming in on the decision.The NCAA, NFL and NBA are all in favor of federal regulation. Some are expressing concern about the impact of betting on the games. There's still a long way to go and it's up to each state to decide if they want to legalize sports betting or now.It is also not known how it will impact jobs and money yet in Nevada.  1702

It is rare that inside President Donald Trump's White House that something bipartisan can get accomplished. But that is exactly what has happened when it comes to trade. WHAT CHANGES TODAYFor nearly thirty years, NAFTA, which stands for the North American Free Trade agreement, governed trading between the United States, Mexico and Canada. It basically sets the rules by which companies needed to follow in order to avoid paying a tariff or fee to ship their product within one of those North American countries. In recent years however, Democrats and Republicans have both criticized the agreement as a reason companies moved their jobs overseas, particularly to Mexico or Asian countries. Beginning today, NAFTA is no more with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) in effect. WHAT'S DIFFERENTThe trade agreement has been read over and scrutinized by lawyers of Fortune 500 companies for months, but some of the biggest impacts affect the auto industry, the steel industry and dairy farmers. Under the agreement, in order to avoid a tariff, 75% of a car must be built in North America. 70% of the steel and aluminum in a car must also come from North America. It also demands 40-45% of the car be built by workers earning at least /hour. That last provision is key because those new wages are nearly triple what Mexico is paying it's workers right now in some instances. Dairy farmers in the United States will also have expanded access into Canada, which is something the US agricultural community has called for years. WILL IT CREATE JOBSThe White House claims this new deal will result in hundreds of thousands of jobs in the coming years. Regarding whether any new jobs are being created right now, Treasury Department spokeswoman Monica Crowley said it is too soon to tell. "Well it just goes into effect today, but we will see that going forward but the good news that we got today but the good news is that manufacturing has hit a 14 month high in the month of June," Crowley said. 2015