Why is it you believe white males are fair and just and color and gender blind,there have only been four justices in the existence of the court who were not white males.
And but for very limited periods the court has not been a beacon of equality.
We have a court that said African Americans are property they are not human. The Dred Scott decision majority opinion written by CJ Taney a slaveholder.The decisions upholding the states rights to discriminate approving Jim Crow laws.One can go on and on in analysis of the Supreme Court and its rulings.
Other than the Warren Court (which your judicial watch people probably lambast)their was never very much enligtenment except through the mainly dissents written by individual jurists such as Cardozo (jewish)and possibly latino(Portugese ancestry)Frankfurther(jewish) and a few other individuals.Of course there were the former Klu Klux Klan members who saw things differently after awhile(so there is still hope for Clarence Thomas)on the Supreme Court.
So in the history of the court i say there is room for a Hispanic American woman and more importantly she has been a judge for many years and an appellate judge for a significant period so are decisions are there to be examined and in context of the case. You must be aware that she did not write the opinion in the New Haven case and of course in litigation someone ,one side always loses does not mean something is wrong in principle just that you were wrong in that case.
You must be acquainted with the facts in the New Haven case it is not a case of "Reverse Discrimination". in a very brief nutshell, The city of New Haven had been successfully sued by African Americans over a period of 20-30 years in more than one lawsuit for racial discrimination. They promulgated this promotional test and no AA were in the promotional band all the whites scored higher than any AfricanAmerican. The city feared if they promoted based on this test they would only be able to promote whites,They feared a lawsuit from the African Americans based upon "disparate results"and the city would lose and pay out large sums of money.The test was a short answer exam for supervisory positions.The city was not sure that the test measured the skills needed to be an effective supervisor. Therefore they choose to throw out the test and make no promotions from it.
I have not read nor seen the Supreme Court decision but I believe the Supremes reversed the Appeals Court 8 to 1.
The Supremes ordered back pay for those denied promotion and i suppose promotions,certainly back pay.As the case goes back i think around ten years thoe denied promotions may have retired so back pay is it.