'%20x='0'%20y='0'%20height='100%25'%20width='100%25'%20%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20xlink%3Ahref=''%3E%3C/image%3E%3C/svg%3E)
Purdue Pharma, the Sackler family-owned pharmaceutical company responsible for the opioid epidemic in the US, filed for bankruptcy in 2019. In 1999, the company started aggressively marketing OxyContin, an opioid painkiller that has since claimed more than half a million lives.
The Sackler family was never criminally charged despite facing a series of lawsuits. Instead, Purdue had to pay hefty fines for misleading the public. As per the NY Times, Purdue does not market its opioids anymore, and an independent monitor currently supervises its production. The Sackler family has been removed from its board in 2018.
By 2020, Purdue Pharma agreed to pay $8 billion in civil and criminal fines, to be paid to the local and state governments. The deal was to reimburse victims who have been harmed by the OxyContin use.
Even though three members of the Sackler family were involved in developing the drug and prescribing them as doctors, the settlement of the Purdue bankruptcy entailed the family’s release from any liability linked to the epidemic. However, to gain immunity, the family had to pay $6 billion to settle thousands of lawsuits filed by state and local governments, hospitals, and affected individuals.
Supreme Court torn over Purdue Pharma's bankruptcy settlement
On Monday, December 4, during the hearing of the case which is being called “Harrington v. Purdue Pharma LP,” SCOTUS struggled to decide whether or not to approve Purdue’s bankruptcy settlement. The court was torn over how much punishment should be delivered to the Sackler family for the opioid crisis.
The justices voiced concern that the settlement would shield the Sacklers from facing criminal lawsuits due to their role in the deadly opioid epidemic. They further worried that it may also harm the victims.
The US Trustee argued that an agreement to exempt the Sackler family from civil lawsuits would violate federal law as they did not file for individual bankruptcy. The government also urged the SCOTUS to reject the deal.
Victims of the drug crisis and the families who lost their members to overdoses were also torn over the settlement. One group of more than 60,000 people relayed that the deal would offer the ideal path for those wishing to hold Purdue accountable. As they said in a filing to the justices:
"Save for one personal injury appellant, the actual victims here want this plan, want the releases, and want closure, not the opportunity for endless, damaging, and assumedly futile litigation against the Sacklers.”
Fifteen others with the same fate told the justices in a separate filing that Purdue’s bankruptcy deal would offer the “only viable mechanism” that could afford the aid needed by the victims. They said the settlement money would also provide resources for treatment as well as prevention of the further spread of opioid abuse.
However, some states, more than 2600 individuals, Canadian municipalities, and some indigenous tribes voted against Purdue Pharma’s bankruptcy plan. They disapproved of it solely because of the legal protections the deal would provide to the Sackler family and their affiliates.
