Do you actually think that if she found a cause for sex and race set asides in private she would not find a reason to do the same in the public arena of the Supreme Court? It would seem that a lawyer may have had some inkling that set asides were unconstitutional even if done in private practice. Her failure to do so indicates that she views sex and racial set asides as being constitutional
"Do you actually think that if she found a cause for sex and race set asides in private she would not find a reason to do the same in the public arena of the Supreme Court?"
I think the hysteria over some of her political views shows the "we only care about her judicial philosophy" claim to be pretty bogus.