CJ Roberts' medical episode was noteworthy, but in the scheme of things was not too much so. Two episodes in fifteen years with no apparent long term effects suggest there is not much there. Yes, we did not hear of his last episode, but was it relevant? Or, was it more a matter of medical privacy that was appropriately kept quiet ... as it should be in any number of cases, including those for less important jobs? I lean toward the latter. Matters that might be relevant should not be kept quiet, but some degree of perspective also must be supplied.
On that front, there has been various discussions on the last two confirmations to the Supreme Court. Some suggest that Roberts/Alito provide enough wiggle room with their rulings like the school choice rulings this term (as compared to Scalia/Thomas) to give lower courts some room to maneuver. I find this of limited valid. The "wiggle room" will be much less useful when lower court judges wish to decide things in a conservative fashion. Likewise, an honest reading (or logical one) would also lead to conservative results. Thus, only a limited number will use the wiggle room to provide less conservative outcomes in many cases.
Ultimately, a lesson taught by Justice William O. Douglas in a booklet he put out over twenty-five years ago, A Living Bill of Rights, offers some possible relief. It also provides a lesson to those who rely on the courts to secure our liberties. Should not the author of Griswold and other "activist" opinions wholeheartedly agree? Only up to a point. He ended his discussion of the Bill of Rights (broadly speaking, including habeas corpus etc.) with a reminder that the courts only take so many cases, much threat to liberty outside its purview or likely caseload.
This would include much private action and cases not brought for various reasons, or blocked for procedural ones. He noted "the reality of freedom in our daily lives is shown by the attitudes and policies of people toward each other.... There we will find the real measure of A Living Bill of Rights." A possibility and a warning provided there, I dare say.