"::On reflection, I'm not sure this does actually belong in the lead.  I don't know if I would call ""activist"" a judgmental word, but I see Jmundo's point.  It is a somewhat inflammatory word.  To many (esp. conservatives), ""activist"" is an insult.  I think ""activist"" is a fair factual description of some of Sotomayor's activities at Princeton and (to a lesser extent) at Yale, but without the context that is present later in the article, the sentence in the lede sort of leaps out, and suggests something quite different from what it turns out to be (i.e. sit-ins, protests, 60s-style ""activism,"" militancy, that sort of thing).  That's not what you mean by the word in this context, but the reader won't know that before reading the full article, which is getting pretty long.  Also, it's not clear to me that this activism is important enough to make the lede anyway.  There's a lot of stuff in the article that's arguably more important than these particular episodes in her life (especially at Yale, where any activism really was a very small part of the story of her time there).  What do you think?  If you really wanted to keep this in the lede, perhaps the wording could be changed, e.g. ""She was an advocate for the hiring of Latino faculty at both schools"" or something like that.  But I'm not sure it belongs.  -   

"