Yesterday, Georgetown Law Dean Bill Treanor informed students and alumni that Ilya Shapiro had been placed “on administrative leave, pending an investigation into whether he violated our policies and expectations of professional conduct” by suggesting that Joe Biden’s policy of choosing a SCOTUS nominee based on race and sex is racist and sexist.

Well, recall that after Treanor sent his initial email condemning Shapiro’s comments, Stern feigned shock at what was happening:

And today, Stern is sticking with his story that he never intended for Shapiro to lose his job at Georgetown Law:

We agree with Stern that firing Ilya Shapiro would be the coward’s way out. But it’s telling that Stern is trying to absolve himself of any role here, particularly given that he’s tripling down on sliming Shapiro as a racist, bigoted troll.

Just look at this garbage:

Suddenly Stern is concerned about libel, after baselessly branding Ilya Shapiro a racist sexist? That’s cute. And what was the purpose of him tagging Georgetown Law in his initial tweets about Shapiro if not to solicit a response from them?

It’s conservatives’ fault that Georgetown Law might fire a good man that Mark Joseph Stern unfairly maligned as racist and sexist with the intent of getting him into trouble with Georgetown Law!

Can’t someone cut Mark a break, already? Hasn’t he been through enough?

Give that man a cookie. He’s done everything he can to help Ilya Shapiro!

It’s technically tripling down, as we noted above (Stern smeared Shapiro in his initial tweets to Georgetown Law and then, then doubled down by suggesting that Shapiro would be an “alleged martyr of cancel culture” if he were fired, and now still contends that Shapiro is a bigot). But Garth Godsman’s point is taken, and it’s the correct one.

What would Mark Joseph Stern do if someone decided to comb through his tweets and flag anything suspicious for Stern’s employer, Slate?

Recommended Twitchy Video