I've been wondering why the New York Times hasn't made the leap into the 21st Century and is still using the term 'Hispanic'.  Their stories on Sotomayor's nomination refer to her with the Euro-centric term, even though Sotomayor calls herself Latina.  Although I'm not Latina myself, I find the term way more appropriate for today's world. Hispanic implies European descent, and for many in Latin America, Spain is not their country of origin. A Huffington Post article put it well:

Hispanic is an English word that originally referred to people from Spain and eventually expanded to include the populations of its colonies in South and Central America. Latino is a Spanish word—hence the feminine form Latina—that refers to people with roots in Latin America and generally excludes the Iberian Peninsula. For many, Hispanic has negative connotations because of its Eurocentrism. Others prefer it because it's gender-neutral. Latino, meanwhile, is perceived as a more authentic-sounding, Spanish-language alternative.

I think it's time to be less Euro-centric, not just in our history books, but also in the words we use to describe others. Using the term Hispanic for people in Latin America especially ignores the millions of people living there of African descent, as well as indiginous populations. I hope Sotomayor will be confirmed as our first Latina Supreme Court Justice, and that she'll continue to be proud to identify herself as such.