U.S. Supreme Court Revokes Bankruptcy Protections for Purdue Pharma Owners

After years of wrangling, it took the U.S. Supreme Court to end the legal protections sought by the Sackler family, the owners of Purdue Pharma.

In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision on Harrington v. Purdue Pharma LP, eliminating the Sackler family’s protections from future lawsuits. Five years before, as part of a settlement of thousands of opioid-related lawsuits related to the blockbuster drug OxyContin, the Sacklers had negotiated a complete release for the family from any liability that might result from future lawsuits. That protection has now been overturned by the Supreme Court decision.

Up to this point, the Sacklers, full owners of this privately held company, had been able to protect themselves from any personal liability as a result of the thousands of lawsuits from every U.S. state, plus counties, cities, hospitals, unions, and other groups. These entities sought to hold Purdue and the Sacklers directly responsible for the devastating opioid crisis that has taken hundreds of thousands of American lives.

Financial Wrangling Dragged on for Years in an Effort to Settle These Lawsuits

As the years of lawsuits and negotiations dragged on, Purdue Pharma filed for bankruptcy protection in 2019. The Sacklers agreed to contribute $6 billion of their personal fortune to help settle these lawsuits. The condition of this contribution was a release from all future lawsuit liability. With this Supreme Court decision, negotiations will have to start again to determine how to hold the Sacklers responsible for the opioid debacle.¹

Why Should the Sacklers Pay for Their Involvement in the Opioid Crisis?

Though the Sacklers and Purdue Pharma have been out of the headlines for the last several years, a truly massive quantity of evidence made it clear that the Sacklers themselves made the decisions that resulted in the criminally fraudulent marketing of OxyContin. A lawsuit filed by the Attorney General of Massachusetts, Maura Healy, exposed their criminality in exquisite detail. The Massachusetts lawsuit summarized the actions of the company:²

• To profit from its dangerous drugs, Purdue engaged in a deadly and illegal scheme to deceive doctors and patients.

• First, Purdue deceived Massachusetts doctors and patients to get more people on its dangerous drugs. Purdue targeted vulnerable people who could be introduced to its opioids, including elderly patients, veterans, and people who had never taken opioids before.

• Second, Purdue misled them into taking higher and more dangerous doses.

• Third, Purdue deceived them into staying on its drugs for longer and more harmful periods of time. All the while, Purdue peddled falsehoods to keep patients away from safer alternatives.

• Even when Purdue knew people in Massachusetts were addicted and dying, Purdue treated doctors and patients as “targets” to sell more drugs. Each part of the scheme earned Purdue more money from Massachusetts opioid sales and caused more addiction and death here in our Commonwealth.

As for the Sackler family’s involvement in these actions (also from this lawsuit):

Defendants Richard Sackler, Beverly Sackler, David Sackler, Ilene Sackler Lefcourt, Jonathan Sackler, Kathe Sackler, Mortimer Sackler, and Theresa Sackler controlled Purdue’s misconduct. Each of them took a seat on the Board of Directors of Purdue Pharma Inc. Together, they always held the controlling majority of the Board, which gave them full power over both Purdue Pharma Inc. and Purdue Pharma L.P. They directed deceptive sales and marketing practices deep within Purdue, sending hundreds of orders to executives and line employees. From the money that Purdue collected selling opioids, they paid themselves and their family billions of dollars.

These are only the briefest of excerpts from this 277-page lawsuit. The entire lawsuit is worth scanning to get a more complete picture of the culpability of Purdue and its board.

What Penalty Would Provide Justice to the Families That Lost Loved Ones?

It may not be possible to assess a penalty that would be just and fair, considering the monumental loss of life that followed the Sackler’s actions. However, some of the officials involved with this Supreme Court case have voiced their sense that relieving the Sacklers of any personal liability was far too forgiving.

During oral arguments on the Supreme Court case on December 4, 2023, U.S. Deputy Solicitor General Curtis Gannon commented that the Sackler family was getting off too easy.³

In the majority opinion on this case, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote:⁴

”The Sacklers have not agreed to place anything approaching their full assets on the table for opioid victims. Yet they seek a judicial order that would extinguish virtually all claims against them for fraud, willful injury, and even wrongful death, all without the consent of those who have brought and seek to bring such claims.”

In 2019, when the Sacklers first began to seek this protection from liability, Massachusetts AG Maura Healy summed up the problem with their attempt:⁵

“Over the last few decades they’ve made billions of dollars through the sale of OxyContin, but they’re not giving that money back.”

“Over the last few decades they’ve made billions of dollars through the sale of OxyContin, but they’re not giving that money back.”

In California, Attorney General Rob Bonta agreed with the Supreme Court decision, noting that the Sacklers should not escape personal penalties for their part in this national disaster. He stated:[6]

“For years, the Sackler family prioritized their own interests and profits over people, fueling the opioid epidemic that ravaged our communities and led to the loss of countless lives across our country. No amount of money will ever undo the devastation that the Sacklers and Purdue Pharma have caused in perpetuating this crisis, but today’s decision will allow those that have suffered at the hands of the Sacklers to hold them accountable for their greed and willful misconduct.”

The Sacklers and Their Cash

In 2016, as the lawsuit situation was heating up, the family had an estimated net worth of $13 billion. According to one news source, the Sackler family extracted approximately $11 billion from the company in the years before the company’s 2019 bankruptcy petition.⁶

CBS News reported that the Sackler wealth was secreted in a vast web of hundreds of companies and trusts, many in offshore tax havens.⁷

In other words, it appeared that the family was able to hold onto billions of dollars in cash and assets, while states, cities, unions, and hospitals have begged for funds to help those who became addicted.

Justice Has Yet to Be Delivered

It is likely that negotiations between the Sacklers and their Purdue Pharma representatives and federal and state authorities will continue for several more years. In the meantime, the Sacklers will continue to reside in mansions in Connecticut, New York, Florida, New Jersey, and the United Kingdom. They will continue to draw on the billions in funds and assets squirreled away before the focus on the family became too intense.

Nothing will bring back the hundreds of thousands of lost souls who suffered because of the Sacklers’ criminal tactics. Justice for these lost lives and shattered families may be very slow in coming. One can hope, however, that as a result of this Supreme Court decision, the scales of justice may yet be balanced when the Sackler family finally experiences full accountability for their actions.

Sources:

Karen

After a few years working at the Narconon center in Oklahoma, Karen has been researching drug trends around the world and writing reports and articles on addiction and recovery for nine years.
read more