三门峡除腋臭手术去哪家医院好三门峡狐臭的大汗腺手术费用多少,三门峡青春痘消除,女孩几岁长青春痘是真还是假,三门峡激光祛除腋臭方法,三门峡割腋臭多少钱,在三门峡治痤疮需要多钱,三门峡未央区治疗痘痘的速效办法

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — High-capacity gun magazines will remain legal in California under a ruling Friday by a federal judge who cited home invasions where a woman used the extra bullets in her weapon to kill an attacker while in two other cases women without additional ammunition ran out of bullets."Individual liberty and freedom are not outmoded concepts," San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez wrote as he declared unconstitutional the law that would have banned possessing any magazines holding more than 10 bullets.California law has prohibited buying or selling such magazines since 2000, but those who had them before then were allowed to keep them.In 2016, the Legislature and voters approved a law removing that provision. The California arm of the National Rifle Association sued and Benitez sided with the group's argument that banning the magazines infringes on the Second Amendment right to bear arms.Benitez had temporarily blocked the law from taking effect with a 2017 ruling.Chuck Michel, an attorney for the NRA and the California Rifle & Pistol Association, said the judge's latest ruling may go much farther by striking down the entire ban, allowing individuals to legally acquire high-capacity magazines for the first time in nearly two decades."We're still digesting the opinion but it appears to us that he struck down both the latest ban on possessing by those who are grandfathered in, but also said that everyone has a right to acquire one," Michel said.Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement that his office is "committed to defending California's common sense gun laws" and is reviewing the decision and evaluating its next steps.The goal of the California law is to deter mass-shootings, with Becerra previously listing as an example the terrorist assault that killed 14 and injured 22 in San Bernardino.Benitez, an appointee of Republican President George W. Bush, called such shootings "exceedingly rare" while emphasizing the everyday robberies, rapes and murders he said might be countered with firearms.The Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, named after a former congresswoman who survived a mass shooting, is also still evaluating whether the decision applies more broadly, said staff attorney Ari Freilich.But Freilich predicted the "extreme outlier decision" will be overturned on appeal and criticized a judge "so deeply out of touch that he believes mass shootings are a 'very small' problem in this country."Becerra previously said similar Second Amendment challenges have been repeatedly rejected by other courts, with at least seven other states and 11 local governments already restricting the possession or sale of large-capacity magazines. The conflicting decisions may ultimately be sorted out by the U.S. Supreme Court.Benitez ruled that magazines holding more than 10 rounds are "arms" under the U.S. Constitution, and that the California law "burdens the core of the Second Amendment by criminalizing the acquisition and possession of these magazines that are commonly held by law-abiding citizens for defense of self, home, and state."Benitez described three home invasions, two of which ended with the female victims running out of bullets.In the third case, the pajama-clad woman with a high-capacity magazine took on three armed intruders, firing at them while simultaneously calling for help on her phone."She had no place to carry an extra magazine and no way to reload because her left hand held the phone with which she was still trying to call 911," the judge wrote, saying she killed one attacker while two escaped.The magazine ban was included in 2016 legislation that voters strengthened with their approval of Proposition 63, which was championed by then-Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom.In a statement, Newsom criticized the judge's ruling."This District Court Judge's failure to uphold a ban on high-capacity magazines is indefensible, dangerous for our communities and contradicts well-established case law," the governor said. "I strongly disagree with the court's assessment that 'the problem of mass shootings is very small.' Our commitment to public safety and defending common sense gun safety laws remains steadfast." 4228

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- A judge preliminarily ordered California Gov. Gavin Newsom to stop issuing directives related to the coronavirus that might interfere with state law.Sutter County Superior Court Judge Sarah Heckman tentatively ruled Monday that one of the dozens of executive orders Newsom has issued overstepped his authority. She more broadly barred him from infringing on the state Legislature.The judge said Newsom overstepped his authority with an executive order that directed counties to send all registered California voters mail-in ballots and regulated the number of polling stations.The lawsuit stems from an executive order that was issued before the state's Legislature passed a similar law related to mail-in ballots.It's the second time a judge in the same county has reached the conclusion, which runs counter to other state and federal court decisions backing the governor's emergency powers.Heckman's decision will become final in 10 days.Newsom's administration says it disagrees and is evaluating its next steps. 1050

Richard Pinedo, a California computer whiz caught by the special counsel's office selling fake online identities to Russians, will be sentenced by a federal judge in Washington on Wednesday, making him the third defendant to learn his sentence in Robert Mueller's probe.Pinedo is one of the more unusual and relatively unknown defendants caught in Mueller court actions so far.In memos sent to a federal judge before his sentencing, Pinedo's defense team and prosecutors capture just how far-reaching the high-profile special counsel investigation into the 2016 election has been.Pinedo ran a website that sold dummy bank accounts to eBay users having trouble with the online transaction service PayPal. His service allowed people online to breeze through PayPal's financial verification steps.He pleaded guilty to one count of identity fraud during a confidential court hearing in D.C. federal court on February 12. His case was made public four days later, when the Justice Department announced its indictment of 13 Russians and three companies for running an online election propaganda effort.Since his guilty plea was unsealed, Pinedo says he's faced online harassment and safety risks because of the national attention.Pinedo asked Judge Dabney Friedrich of the U.S. District Court in D.C. to spare him from serving time in prison. Prosecutors haven't asked the judge for any particular sentence — though they did stop short of asking for his imprisonment in a recent court filing.Prosecutors told the judge that Pinedo gave them "significant assistance" and that his admissions and testimony "saved the government significant time and resources in the investigation."The prosecutors describe Pinedo's crime as "identity fraud on a large scale, committed remotely through the ease of the internet, with real-life damage inflicted on scores of innocent victims," according to their memo to the judge. Since they wrote to the judge in late September, Friedrich has asked for clarification on the number of victims.Court staff calculated a recommended sentence of 12 to 18 months in prison for Pinedo, but given the prosecutors' leniency in their argument before his sentencing, it's unlikely he'd serve that much time, if any.Previously, two other defendants in the Mueller investigation, the Dutch lawyer Alex Van Der Zwaan and former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos, received 30-day and 14-day prison sentences, respectively. Both had lied to investigators.Several other defendants who've pleaded guilty to charges from Mueller, including former national security adviser Michael Flynn, former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his deputy Rick Gates, have not yet been sentenced. 2711

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A staunchly conservative political party in deep-blue California will get to keep its name after the governor vetoed a bill aimed at banning what state lawmakers say are misleading monikers.Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Wednesday he had vetoed a bill that would have banned political parties from using "no party preference," ''decline to state" or "independent" in their official names.The bill would have applied to all political parties. But it was aimed at the American Independent Party, which has been an option for California voters since 1968.More California voters are registering with no party preference, now accounting for 28.3% of all registered voters. If "no party preference" were a political party, it would be the second largest in the state behind the Democrats.Critics say the American Independent Party has benefited from this trend because its name confuses voters into believing they are registering as independents. The party makes up 2.59% of California's registered voters, making it the third largest political party in the state after the Democratic Party at 43.1% and the Republican Party at 23.6%.In 2016, the Los Angeles Times surveyed the party's registered members and found most did not know they had registered to vote with the party. But Newsom said he vetoed the bill because he worried it was unconstitutional."By requiring one existing political party to change its current name, this bill could be interpreted as a violation of the rights of free speech and association guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution," Newsom wrote in his veto message.Representatives for the American Independent Party did not respond to an email and phone call seeking comment. The party's website says it nominated Donald Trump for president in 2016 and "God willing, 2020."Democratic Sen. Tom Umberg, the bill's author, warned the mistaken registration could have electoral consequences. People registered with another political party would not be allowed to vote in the state's pivotal Democratic presidential primary in March.But Newsom signed another bill by Umberg that could help people rectify any registration mistakes. The law, signed Tuesday, allows voters to register to vote or update their registration at all polling places on election day.If people show up to vote in the Democratic presidential primary and are ineligible because they are registered with the American Independent Party, they can change their registration on the spot and cast a ballot. The ballot would be conditional, meaning it would not be counted until after the person's registration could be verified. 2676

RICHMOND, Va. — A Virginia judge has dissolved one injunction but imposed another preventing Virginia's governor from removing an enormous statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee. The new 90-day injunction bars the statue’s removal from Richmond's Monument Avenue while claims in a lawsuit filed by a group of property owners are litigated. Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring has moved to dismiss the case, but the judge says the property owners have standing and could succeed on at least one of their claims. Gov. Ralph Northam announced plans to remove the statue in early June, citing the pain felt across the country about the death of George Floyd. 667