Browse By

How Do We Know Justice Roberts is Not On Drugs?

So, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts had a “seizure” yesterday. It wasn’t the first time, you know.

According to the New York Daily News, this kind of “seizure” has happened to John Roberts at least one time before. They report that John Roberts also fell down and lost consciousness while playing golf back in 1993.

This time, he was on a dock in at his vacation home in Port Clyde, Maine. I know Port Clyde. It’s not exactly a bustling metropolis. It’s a sleepy little town by the ocean, with bed and breakfasts and rental cottages. It’s the kind of place that people like John Roberts go to in order to relax.

So, I doubt the suggestion in the Daily News article that these seizures could be brought on by stress. The kind of stress that is required to bring on seizures is pretty rare in places like out on the golf course or on a boat dock at a vacation home. If John Roberts really is having stress-induced seizures that lead him to lose consciousness and fall down while playing golf and walking out on the dock at his oceanside vacation home, then he’s a maniac.

There is something other than stress that can induce “seizures” that make people fall down and lose consciousness: Psychoactive drugs. Remember when Britney Spears all of a sudden lost consciousness and had to be carried out of her birthday party? It wasn’t stress that caused that incident.

How do we know that Justice John Roberts isn’t losing consciousness because he’s on some kind of drug obtained by prescription or on the street?

If John Roberts is taking psychoactive drugs, he wouldn’t be the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to do so. His predecessor, Chief Justice William Rehnquist, was hooked on the psychoactive drug Placidyl for years while serving as Chief Justice, and was often under the influence of the drug while hearing arguments in legal cases before the Court.

The world did not learn of William Rehnquist’s drug habit until he died. Until then, it was all hushed up, and Rehnquist refused to step down.

So, it’s really not out of hand to speculate that John Roberts is having issues of his own with psychoactive drugs. We don’t know that his blackouts are caused by drugs, but on the other hand, we also don’t know that the blackouts are not caused by drugs.

It’s a mystery that may only be solved after John Roberts dies himself. In the meanwhile, all our lives will be shaped by the decisions Roberts makes.

37 thoughts on “How Do We Know Justice Roberts is Not On Drugs?”

  1. John Stracke says:

    There’s no positive reason to think his seizures are caused by drugs. Even absent stress, seizures are not that uncommon; some doctors think that, if all of them were reported, we’d see that something like 10% of the population has had them. Also, once you’ve had a seizure, your chance of having another one goes up by about 50%, even if the doctors can’t find a cause.

    (And, yes, there are people who don’t go to the doctor when they have a seizure. I know one person who described a time when she blacked out; when she came to, her boyfriend reported that she’d been lying on the floor twitching. Clearly a seizure, but, at the time, she just shrugged it off.)

  2. Peregrin Wood says:

    I’m not saying that I have any proof that John Roberts is on drugs. I’m just saying that it’s a possibility, and given Rehnquist’s history, pointing out that we probably wouldn’t be told if it was drugs.

    I’m bothered by the double standard for John Roberts and entertainment personalities. An entertainment personality blacks out, and everyone assumes it’s drugs. John Roberts blacks out, and people scratch their heads and say, “Golly, we sure don’t know how that could have happened!”

  3. Luke says:

    Sorry, but I have to say I am generally opposed to this article. May I ask if you have a medical degree and have examined John Roberts? Do you have acess to his medical records and his prior history? Are you familiar with his medications, if any, and how they interact?
    It is not logical to assume that simply because one coverup occured with one Judge; that this incident is also representative of a coverup.
    And no, I don’t assume that if a entertainment personality blacks out that it is drugs; I reserve judgement until those who are in the know, generally their doctor, have spoken out, and I provisionally believe that until other evidence is presented. This is a subtle slur against John Roberts, rather than attacking his ideas or positions, and I expect better from writers using this site.

  4. Peregrin Wood says:

    But Luke, I didn’t say that there was a coverup taking place. I said it wouldn’t be out of hand to consider that drugs are involved and that there’s a coverup of that, given the history with Rehnquist.

    I didn’t diagnose Roberts. I didn’t say I knew what the problem is. I said it’s a reasonable question.

    And here you are, Luke, bringing up the issue of his medications, and how they interact… which is the very sort of thing I was talking about.

    Subtle? I don’t think you read what I actually wrote, Luke.

  5. Luke says:

    By subtle I meant that it seemed like you were using the question “is it possible Roberts is using drugs” to discredit him and his decisions while on the Court, and it seemed like an ad hominem style arguement.
    Are you more concerned about the potential for him taking drugs for a recognized ailment of some sort which are reacting badly and causing him to have seizures, or are you suggesting that he might be taking drugs for other purposes, either addiction or for enjoyment?
    I assumed from your tone that you meant the latter, but if not, I apologize.

  6. Luke says:

    And you still seem to be inferring quite a bit from a very limited set of data; two incidences of seizures and your claim that it can not be due to stress because he was not in a stressful environment.
    About that last point, I have also read that constant stress can raise levels of stress hormones in the body that can contribute to heart disease and other problems; it is just as probable that his seizures could be attributed to this; and again why I concluded that you are reaching by assuming it is “drugs”.

  7. Luke says:

    Correction, I should say “you are reaching by attributing his seizures to the possibility of him taking drugs.”

  8. Peregrin Wood says:

    It’s a very limited set of data, yes. That’s part of the problem, and part of the reason I wrote the article as I did. Credibility on matters such as the health of Supreme Court Justices has been substantially damaged by the coverup of Rehnquist’s on-the-job beffudlement on account of prescription drugs.

  9. Iroquois says:

    Maybe he choked on a pretzel.

  10. Luke says:

    Whose credibility is damaged in your mind? Is it the same people surrounding John Roberts as were in the employ of William Rehnquist? The same doctors? Lawyers arguing before the court in position to see any fuddled thinking? Reporters covering the Supreme Court? Who perpetrated the cover up for Rehnquist; and could be perpetrating the potential coverup for Roberts that you suspect?

  11. Luke says:

    I would think that any lawyer arguing before the court who had witnessed a drugged up Renquist would be duty bound to tell, if only to get him excused from the case, but also to act in the interest of their client.

  12. LarryC says:

    So do you think that Roberts also shaves his genitalia like Brittney?

  13. Phil says:

    I can’t believe how stupid you are. Stop wasting your time making arguments about what is “possible.” Look for actual evidence of things and don’t open your mouth until you have facts. Loser.

  14. oddjob says:

    So, it’s really not out of hand to speculate that John Roberts is having issues of his own with psychoactive drugs. We don’t know that his blackouts are caused by drugs, but on the other hand, we also don’t know that the blackouts are not caused by drugs.

    Man, you have no idea how wacky this is! As an epileptic, all I can say is while your assertion is certainly possible, it’s so unsubtantiated it’s just……..


  15. r4d20 says:

    Psychoactive drugs might just make a person less conservative, so maybe it is a good thing.

  16. Steve says:

    Roberts is probably not on drugs. Having said that, he probably will be soon: Helllllllo, Dilantin!

    Dilantin is an age old, fairly safe anti-seizure medication. If his dose is too low, he may still have seizures. (With one seizure every 14 years, it might take a while to figure that out!) You’ll know if it’s too high because his face will appear to be coarse and his lips may swell.

    And even if it is the correct dose, the drug still causes constipation. If the start of the court session is ever delayed, it might be because our Chief Justice can’t go.

  17. Peregrin Wood says:

    People who don’t understand the usefulness of exploring what’s possible, in the absence of evidence about what actually is, aren’t capable of much in the way of interesting thought.

    As for the discussion being unsubstantiated, that’s the point when I talk about the worth of being able to speculate. Speculation doesn’t claim to be true. It only claims to be an exploration of what could be true.

    I’m sorry so many visitors here aren’t capable of tolerating anything more than a simplistic discussion of what facts are known. I’m not going to allow their limitation to restrain what I write.

  18. mutt says:

    EVERYONE in public office should piss in a cup weekly.
    If its good enough for burger flippers, its good enough for Senators, Reps, Presidents, & SC judges.

  19. Tim says:

    Or it could have just been a seizure.

  20. Rob says:

    The Democratic Party has spoken out against Chief Justice Roberts and his decisions. Now Peregrin Wood has published an article suggesting the possibility that Roberts is using drugs. So, it’s really not out of hand to speculate that Peregrin Wood is in the pay of the Democratic Party. Admittedly, this is unsubstantiated. But speculation doesn’t claim to be true. It only claims to be an exploration of what could be true.

  21. Mappo says:

    I speculate that Peregrin Wood is a pedophile who eats his own feces. I’m not claiming it is true, I’m just speculating and exploring the possibilities.

  22. Peregrin Wood says:

    No, it’s not hard to speculate these things. There’s no precedent, however, for such things here at Irregular Times. There’s no history of us being paid as shills, or being pedophiles or eating shit.

    There is, however, a precedent for the Chief Justice being on mind-impairing drugs, and it being covered up. That’s takes matters to another level, and what makes the speculation quite different.

    Also, I’m not Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America. I don’t hold the power that John Roberts does. I do think that makes it more important to ask questions about Justice Roberts, but do go ahead and speculate about me eating shit, if you really think that’s just as important. It doesn’t bother me.

    What does bother me is that there has been a loss of credibility in the full and honest reporting on the health of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Rehnquist was essentially stoned while on the bench for years, and a lot of people knew about it, and no one did the proper thing and let the public know that their democracy was in the hands of an intoxicated judge.

    So yes, I think that it’s important to ask questions. I’m disappointed that so many fellow citizens are offended by the asking of those questions.

    And, by the way, I think that mutt is right. If the Supreme Court is going to allow for employers to force workers to pee in a cup for drug tests, or risk losing their jobs, I think it makes perfect sense that we the people expect the Supreme Court Justices to do the same, to make sure that they’re not in altered states of consciousness, like Rehnquist was, when hearing legal arguments on matters of our liberty.

    The blogger over at Atlantic Monthly may think that’s a “wild-eyed” suggestion for me to make, but he’s never seen my eyes. Let him go on speculating about them, I guess.

  23. Mappo says:

    There have been pedophiles on the internet. You are on the internet. Pedophiles on the internet are bad and dangerous just like Chris Hanson says.

    Hence, you may be a dangerous internet pedophile and I am going to speculate about it.

  24. Peregrin Wood says:

    Nice, and yes, I MAY be, and you can go on and speculate about it. However, that speculation is not quite as well based as my speculation about WHETHER John Roberts is on drugs, prescription or illegal. (Many people, including that fellow at The Atlantic, seem to have missed the fact that I never claimed to know that John Roberts is taking drugs.)

    People who have been on the Internet is a much larger group of people than people who have been Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Also, standards for behavior for people who have been on the Internet as a group are for good reason not as high as the standards we should set for Chief Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States.

    When you fail to account for these differences, your comparison gets sloppy.

    Still, yes, you’re free to go and speculate, and people can make of it what they will.

    It’s weird that you seem to think that’s a crazy idea.

  25. Rob says:

    “That fellow on the Atlantic” is Andrew Sullivan, a former editor-in-chief of The New Republic, now a columnist for The Sunday Times of London and a blogger for The Atlantic. Peregrin Wood’s lack of knowledge about journalists is another bit of evidence that he or she is a paid operative of the Democratic Party, when not otherwise occupied with Internet pedophilia.

  26. Mappo says:


    Further, our LACK of knowledge of his LACK of knowledge means we have NO evidence that he is NOT a Democratic operative or a pedophile.

  27. Peregrin Wood says:

    Ha, that’s funny, sort of in a weird deluded kind of way. Why should I keep track of who’s the former whatever at The New Republic if he calls me wild-eyed without even reading what I’ve written carefully?

    And Mappo, you’re continuing to very carefully avoid discussing the legacy of Rehnquist. Interesting, that.

  28. ibid says:

    You have obviously never played golf.

  29. Iroquois says:

    Well documented and responsibly written. Peregrin asks questions that need to be asked. After all, justice is supposed to be blind, not stoned.

    Political coverups of medical doings are not at all far-fetched. We have the historical examples of FDR secretly in a wheelchair and JFK leaving his crutches just offstage to give campaign speeches. Also there’s that Republican who keeps getting arrested for prescription drug abuse…what was that guy’s name again?

    I don’t see the name of that blogger guy Rob is talking about–maybe he’s On Something. And what’s Mappo been smoking?

    Of course Peregrin is an admitted pedophile. Just last week he was at the Harry Potter thingy checking out the teeny boppers with their short skirt costume thingies. So what. Do these guys think Peregrin is going to reach out of their computers and GRAB them? Maybe they think Peregrin can SEE them from inside their computer screens. Come on guys, if you’re that paranoid from all the shit you take, why don’t you just put on some clothes when you go in front of the computer?

  30. Mike says:

    Funny comments, better than the story 😉

    honestly, Peregrin you have an interesting & plausible hypothesis. But until there is proof about the causes of the seizures, we’ll never know. Roberts, the Supreme Court and the immoral Bush & Co will never let the truth be known. They don’t want another huge scandal to further damage their tenuous grip on power.

    So all we have left is speculation. Sad how the truth is so hard to get in regards to political matters and our wonderful American govt !

  31. plane says:

    We also don’t know if Roberts is into sadistic sex….he could have been with his gay lover on the dock and their choking game just got out of hand….or maybe he and his wife were there together along with another couple….their favorite swinging partners the Vitters of Louisiana….they all choked off the Chief Justice….we just don’t know.

  32. rjp3 says:

    This was a great and important article … thanks for being able to explore the grey areas and not explore the “black-outs” of information about the prior Chief Justice. Great what if … to make one consider options. The angry postings are to be expected most people are stuck brain development that favors “black or white” or “facts” as opposed to thinking. Just read the angry comments to see that. These people used to be called THE MASSES because they could be easily manipulated and support authority figures without questioning. America has far to many of these types these days … sheeps being led by wolves.

  33. Ryan says:

    It is an interesting hypothesis, and one that is valid to ask. I’m glad I came across this post, because it hadn’t occurred to me.

    My initial reaction to the news that C.J. Roberts had suffered a seizure (and having suffered at least one other in the pasts, officially making him an epileptic) was that he is an ill man. How ill he is will likely become known before he dies; my guess is we’ll “know more” in the next few years.

    But keep in mind that even before there were adequate medical treatments for epilepsy, great and competent men (who would easily blow away Roberts on his best day) lived and functioned with the illness. (Check out Dostoevsky’s bio for one example.)

  34. Brian says:

    “news not fit for print” That sounds right to me.

  35. Iroquois says:

    Roberts’ EEG was normal. Epileptics usually have some abnormal brain activity, especially immediately after a seizure, and Roberts was taken to hospital immediately.

    Descriptions of the events say he “blacked out” both times, this time being injured in a fall. Most epileptics have some warning (aura) of an impending seizure and can take precautions not to fall once they have experienced it.

    It also says “brain seizure” not “gran mal seizure”, leaving you to wonder if there was any of the usual muscle twitching that accompanied it.

  36. badgervan says:

    In every close-up photo that I’ve seen of Roberts, his eyes are extremely bloodshot. Wonder what is causing this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!