* What say the Constitution about “True Threats”? I promise this isn’t a spinoff show about vampires and faeries. [The Daily Beast] * The folks at Volokh aren’t too happy about how the Supreme Court reads its adequate and state ground doctrine. [Reason] * You aren’t the only one suspicious that Clarence Thomas did a major rehaul of the 2nd Amendment. [Washington Post] * If Donald Trump gets charged, it’ll take a while before the process really sets in. Bring a good book. [Reuters] * A Virginia judge went out of his way to show that he knows the law when it comes to embyos. Slave law. This is 2023. [ABA Journal]

New York Changes Its Bar Exam Application: This revision will promote diversity within the profession. It May Be Getting Dark And Stormy For This Lawyer: In terms of legal ethics in the Trump v. Stormy Daniels hush money payout scheme, that is. Have You Ever Seen A Pitch As Good As This?...

Ed. note: Welcome to our daily feature, Trivia Question of the Day! St. Patrick’s Day may be recognized across the country, but it’s only a legal holiday in two places in America. Can you name them? Hint: One location is a southern city while the other is a county within the northeastern part of the country. See the answer on the next page. Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn. 1 2Next »

Stormy Daniels What is it about Donald Trump that causes good lawyers to break bad? It’s a magical superpower that felled Rudy, Dersh, and too many others to count. And now it appears to have claimed another victim in the form of Joseph Tacopina, the celebrity defense lawyer representing Trump in both the E. Jean Carroll defamation/battery case and in the reportedly impending charges by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg arising out of the 2016 hush money payment to pornstar Stormy Daniels. As Just Security editor Ryan Goodman points out, Tacopina appears to have consulted with Daniels back in 2018 before she hired Michael Avenatti. Trump attorney Joe Tacopina has had an attorney-client relationship with Stormy Daniels. Under ABA, NYS ethics rules, difficult to see how he can represent Trump; call Daniel’s claim of affair untrue; call her an extortionist (and Trump the victim). In his own words in 2018👇 pic.twitter.com/I5Q25yMFWx — Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw) March 17, 2023 Goodman, a professor at NYU Law, notes that the conversation about the hush money payment created an attorney-client relationship under both ABA rules and New York’s Rules of Professional Conduct. Indeed, Tacopina admitted this to CNN’s Don Lemon five years ago, saying, “I can’t really talk about my impressions or any conversations we had because there is an attorney- client privilege that attaches even to a consultation.” And so his on-air antics this week, not to say his representation of Trump in a matter arising out of that payment to Daniels, seem even weirder. On Monday, Tacopina went on ABC’s Good Morning America and accused Daniels of extorting his client. “This was a plain extortion, and I don’t know since when we’ve decided to start prosecuting extortion victims?” the lawyer huffed to George Stephanopoulos. “He’s vehemently denied this affair, but he had to pay the money because there was going to be an allegation that was going to be publicly embarrassing to him regardless of the campaign.” On Tuesday, he was practically manic with NBC’s Ari Melber, grabbing the papers out of the host’s hand and insisting that when Trump falsely claimed not to know about the hush money agreement, he wasn’t actually lying. He was actually protecting Daniels, the extortionist. Here’s why it’s not a lie. Because it was a confidential settlement. So if he acknowledged that, he would be violating the confidential settlement. So, is it the truth? Of course it’s not the truth. Was he supposed to tell the truth? He would be in violation of the agreement if he told the truth. So by him doing that, he was abiding by, not only his rights, but Stormy Daniels’s rights. This isn’t even the first time Tacopina has gotten caught making statements rubbishing Trump’s claims. On CNBC in 2020, he mocked Trump’s claim that he was acting in his official capacity when he denied E. Jean Carroll’s rape allegations and accused her of participating in a Democratic hoax. “Calling an alleged victim of rape … a liar is not an act in his official capacity,” he scoffed, adding later, “Although ad hominem attacks on members of the regular public may be a regular occurrence in the Oval Office these days, Article II of the Constitution does not include within the functions of the presidency the role of Chief Mudslinger.” Tacopina now represents Trump in the related case filed in 2022 under New York’s newly enacted Adult Survivors Act. That suit also claims defamation because Trump repeated his original statement about Carroll, more or less verbatim, in October of 2022, long after he left office. Both cases are set to go to trial next month. Meanwhile, Daniels is reported to have testified to Bragg’s grand jury yesterday, and Trump himself rejected an offer to come in and testify without immunity — i.e., incriminate himself and/or commit perjury. If indeed an indictment of Trump is imminent, it’s possible Bragg could move to disqualify Tacopina based on the prior attorney-client relationship with Daniels. Bragg must prove: "(1) the existence of a prior attorney-client relationship [check], (2) that the matters involved in both representations are substantially related [check], and (3) that the interests of the present client and former client are materially adverse." Checkmate. /3 — Opening Arguments (@openargs) March 17, 2023 On the other hand, Tacopina seems inclined to go on television and rant about his client’s legal strategy at length, so perhaps he’s worth keeping around. Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics and appears on the Opening Arguments podcast.

When creating a website for your law firm, one of the last things you probably think about is its colors. This is an important decision, just like the other content on your website. It can affect whether your clients stay on your website and take specific actions. Continue reading to find out why the color choice for your website can make or break its traffic. Color Psychology Digital marketers use their knowledge of color psychology when thinking about a website’s color choices. Color psychology studies how colors impact people’s behaviors, emotions, and moods. Whether conscious of it or not, we react in a specific way to specific colors. The colors on your website represent your brand and the message you want to convey to your clients. That is why you want to be strategic about the colors you use. The Importance of Your Website’s Colors Your website’s colors and logo affect more than just the overall aesthetic. The colors that you include can help your law firm reach its goals. Certain colors can actually convince your clients to take a specific action. Digital marketers use their knowledge of color psychology and the common reactions to each color to their advantage.  How to Choose Your Website’s Colors To make the most of your website’s colors, you must share the specific goals that you want to meet with your website. These goals are very important when choosing your website’s colors.  Most law firms use traditional colors of navy blue, gray or even dark green. These colors are considered “standard” and “conservative.” Unfortunately, almost every one of your competitors are using the exact same color palette in their logo, branding, and website. Take the time to consider using colors that are unconventional in the legal industry to remain memorable. Certain legal websites owned by women are embracing hot pink, and other estate planning websites are using more cheerful colors to emphasize life instead of the thought of death.  Consider Your Practice Areas You can also choose your website’s colors based on your practice areas. Certain colors pair perfectly with your practice areas. If you are a criminal defense attorney, your colors and branding should be different than that of a guardian ad litem attorney. Criminal defense attorneys may want to have bolder and stronger colors (yellow and black), while a guardian ad litem attorney fighting for the rights of children might want to have softer colors (pale pastels).  Applying Your Website’s Colors Correctly Once you choose your website’s colors, you want to ensure they are correctly applied throughout your website. Applying your colors throughout your website can help with client engagement and highlighting certain sections on your website. You want to ensure that your colors are visually appealing to your clients and bring awareness to your website’s sections. To do this, you may want to take advantage of contrasting colors. Contrasting colors help to improve a user’s readability. They can also help emphasize certain website sections that you want your clients to focus on. Digital Marketing Next Steps The colors you choose for your law firm website are important. They can be as important as the content you publish on your web pages and blog. Take the time to see what your competitors are using for colors and branding, and then make an attempt to distinguish yourself from them. Make sure that your colors are memorable and can allow you to easily differentiate your law firm from others online.  Annette Choti, Esq. graduated from law school 20 years ago, and is the Founder of Law Quill, a legal digital marketing agency focused on small and solo law firms. Annette wrote the bestselling book Click Magnet: The Ultimate Digital Marketing Guide For Law Firms, and hosts the podcast Legal Marketing Lounge. She is a sought-after keynote and CLE speaker throughout the United States and Canada. Annette used to do theatre and professional comedy, which is not so different from the legal field if we are all being honest. Annette can be found on LinkedIn or at at annette@lawquill.com.