But she has become increasingly worthless on social and cultural issues. The only good recent vote vote in that area I can think of is the 5-4 decision in favor of the Boy Scouts against the radical gay lobby.
And her talk of 'judicial independence' is nonsense, because what she really means is the same thing meant by all who scream it whenever the Court's absurd decisions get the derision and criticism they deserve -- judicial supremacy. If they don't like it, then they should stop making themselves into just another political instrument. And why whine about it anyway? Its not like anyone is actually doing anything about it other than talk. Their supremacy, though never intended, is assured.
There were a couple other positive rulings that she made, US vs Lopez comes to mind. I am sure if you poked through history you'd find more social and cultural cases in the past few years where she did vote with Scalia and company.
That said, you are right, her early years of solid jurisprudence have been swept away by an increasing number of activist rulings in recent years. At one time she was said to be a Rehnquist like conservative. It's sad, really.
Her time will end in a few months, thankfully. And while I thank her for her service, I don't consider her worthy of the respect given to our great Chief Justice.