If you are looking for someone to suggest that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ought to step down from the United States Supreme Court so that a Democratic president can appoint her successor, you are looking in the wrong place. At 82, she still works out regularly with a personal trainer and is probably in better physical shape than many Daily Kos readers. Her mental abilities are well demonstrated in her questions during oral arguments and her written opinions. We still need her experienced voice on the court, even if it is only in dissent.
A report on Justice Ginsburg for People for the American Way, includes this:
Justice Ginsburg has emerged as a crucial and powerfully eloquent voice for protecting the legislation produced by the civilizing movements of our time. She has also continued to spell out a constitutional vision that includes robust democracy, an inclusive economy, and ample civil liberty for all of us.
As an impassioned and thorough dissenter, Ginsburg continues a visionary tradition that goes back to Justice William Johnson, who was nominated to the Court by President Thomas Jefferson in 1804 and launched the practice of filing dissenting opinions; Justice John Marshall Harlan, whose dissenting opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) insisted that Jim Crow segregation was unconstitutional because “in view of the Constitution, in the eye of the law, there is no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens”; and Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, whose prescient dissent from the fateful Lochner decision, which struck down wage and hour legislation (1905), argued that the case was “decided upon an economic theory which a large part of the country does not entertain.” Like her constitutional forerunners, Ginsburg painstakingly demonstrates how an errant majority has trampled constitutional justice and equality.
Linda Hirshman’s book, Sisters In Law: How Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg Went to the Supreme Court and Changed the World, takes a look at the careers of the first women on the court.