Reuters forgets a little something III

Reuters correspondents leap at the opportunity to identify the Israel Supreme (High) Court and quote Justices by name when legal decisions taken by the Court comport with correspondents' personal political views and advocacy agendas.  Conversely, when High Court rulings are viewed as an affront by these same correspondents, readers are rarely informed that the ruling was handed down by the highest Court in the land nor are Justices identified.  In this way, Reuters' correspondents laud and promote decisions they like and devalue decisions they hold in contempt (no pun intended).

Caught in the act once again, are Reuters correspondents Tom Perry and Allyn Fisher-Ilan who report:

An Israeli court on Wednesday rejected a request by a Palestinian woman from the Gaza Strip to study in the Israeli-occupied West Bank despite Israel's recent moves to relax the Gaza blockade.

Er, yes that was the Israeli High Court.  Note how, by comparison to this Reuters article on Highway 443 where the High Court ruled in favor of Palestinians and correspondent Jeffrey Heller proudly trumpets the decision with all fanfare, the ruling in the more recent case has gone against a Palestinian and Reuters slaps the decision by demoting the Israel High Court to common subordinate status, only anonymously citing the Justices.

Proving once again, that for Reuters, the (Israeli) law is an ass when it disagrees.