dippin

You mean like the rest of the actual speech where the sentence came from? If people are too lazy to read it here's the cliffnotes:

She was discussing the impact of increased minority and female participation in law, and discussed how every key case on discrimination, segregation and so on had a minority or female either judging or advocating the case. As such, he says that the idea that wise men and wise women reach the same wise decisions was false, because there are more than one definitions of what a wise decision is, and in this context of judging and discussing discrimination, a Latina woman with the experiences related to discrimination that come with the territory should (but will not necessarily) reach a wiser decision than a man who has never experienced that type of discrimination.

She then goes on to say that the real challenge is to know when that experience is biasing their judgment and when that experience is enriching it, and that no one should adopt the identity of the "Latin Judge" or whatever other minority.

Not at all different from what Alito said, but apparently the same people who are quick to deny even the possibility of racism elsewhere in this case are so hellbent as to ignore any and every shred of evidence that they are wrong. At no point does she say that minorities make better judges, and that in fact is entirely contradicted several times during that speech, which would make sense given that her entire point is that there are more than one possible wise decisions.