WASHINGTON -LRB- CNN -RRB- -- Newly released documents from Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor 's service on the board of a Puerto Rican civil rights organization show the group opposed Robert Bork 's nomination to the high court more than two decades ago . Judge Sonia Sotomayor is set to face Supreme Court confirmation hearings . Sotomayor , a judge on the New York-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit , was nominated by President Obama in May to fill the vacancy of retiring Justice David Souter . Her confirmation hearings are set to begin July 13 . She served as a board member of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund from 1980-92 , leaving when she became a federal judge . During her years on the PRLDEF board , the group opposed President Reagan 's 1987 nomination of the conservative Bork -- then a federal appeals judge -- `` because of the threat he poses to the civil rights of the Latino community , '' according to the documents . The group 's attorneys prepared press releases and `` worked on numerous efforts to build coalitions against the nominee , '' according to the documents . Bork was ultimately rejected by the Senate . The Fund also met in 1987 with staff at the New York Daily News to address what it called `` negative images of Puerto Ricans presented by the News ' staff , '' including well-known columnist Jimmy Breslin . Republicans are challenging Sotomayor 's record on affirmative action , and the newly released documents on her work at the Fund will likely be a centerpiece of debate at the upcoming confirmation hearings . The 350 pages of documents released Wednesday by the Senate Judiciary Committee show the Fund filed hundreds of discrimination lawsuits over the years on behalf of Hispanics . The documents do not reveal whether Sotomayor was directly involved in them . She was a private attorney at the time , and was volunteering for the group . However , they reflect the Fund 's strong push to establish a precedent of cases that would establish legal authority to uphold workplace quotas for minorities . One case dealt with promotions in the New York City Police Department . A May 1992 memo on `` litigation highlights '' noted , `` We obtained quota promotions for Latinos and African Americans to the rank of sergeant . '' A PRLDEF class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of minority applicants claimed advancement exams were `` discriminatory and not job related . '' The city settled , agreeing to promotions that reflected the percentage of Hispanic test-takers . Backpay and retroactive seniority were also provided . `` As a result , '' said the memo , `` almost 100 Hispanics were promoted , over twice the number that would have been promoted without the settlement . '' Fast forward 17 years to a case Sotomayor heard as an appeals judge . She and her colleagues rejected a lawsuit by white firefighters in New Haven , Connecticut , after the city threw out the results of promotional exams because too few minorities qualified for advancement . In the case , one Hispanic and 19 white firefighters who scored high on the exams and would have gained captain and lieutenant positions claimed `` reverse '' discrimination . Last week , the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the so-called `` New Haven 20 , '' concluding `` the city rejected the test results solely because the higher scoring candidates were white . '' Justice Anthony Kennedy , writing for the majority said , `` No individual should face workplace discrimination based on race . '' The high court said municipalities would now have to establish `` a strong basis of evidence '' that promotion tests were unfairly designed or administered before nullifying them , and not simply because too many minorities did poorly . Sotomayor 's views in the case have been criticized by some conservatives , saying it shows she supports racial preferences for Hispanic and other minorities . The high court dissent , however , criticized the ruling for reinterpreting what Congress intended . `` Congress endeavored to promote equal opportunity in fact , and not simply in form , '' wrote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg . `` The damage today 's decision does to that objective is untold . '' Supporters also contend the PRLDEF documents add nothing to the nomination debate . `` Documents that Judge Sotomayor did not write , or approve -- many of them more than two decades old -- are irrelevant to her nomination , '' according to a White House statement . `` The Senate should judge her on her own record -- especially her judicial record -- not on briefs that other lawyers wrote 20 years ago . '' Opponents , however , claim Sotomayor 's prior work for PRLDEF , and her off-the-bench comments reveal doubts about her fairness and impartiality as a judge . In addition , some Republicans on the committee expressed concern the material was released only 12 days before the hearings begin . `` This has all the hallmarks of a deliberate delay and an attempt to frustrate a thorough review of this important information , '' said Stephen Boyd , a spokesman for Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama , ranking Republican on the committee . `` If these dilatory tactics continue , it will be increasingly more difficult for the hearing to go forward on July 13 . '' Sotomayor supporters point out a similar `` document dump '' by the Bush White House in the days before Chief Justice John Roberts testified before the Senate in September 2005 . And the Bush administration also refused to turn over material from Justice Samuel Alito 's prior service in the Reagan and Bush Justice Departments in the 1980s , arguing his subsequent judicial record was sufficient to determine his qualifications to sit on the high court .