Families Devastated by Supreme Court Decision to Reject Purdue Opioid Settlement
In a deeply emotional and controversial decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected a settlement that would have provided billions of dollars to opioid treatment centers and victims of the opioid epidemic. The 5-4 ruling against the settlement with Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, has left many families devastated, including those who have lost loved ones to opioid overdoses.
Kay Scarpone, a resident of Kingston, New Hampshire, is one such individual. She lost her son in 2015 to an opioid overdose. “My son was a sergeant in the U.S. Marine Corps,” she said. “He fought for a year in the war in Afghanistan, and he came home to American soil and died from an overdose because of PTSD.” Scarpone expressed her profound disappointment with the court’s decision, stating, “It’s not fair. We’ll keep fighting, though. We won’t give up.”
The settlement would have required the Sackler family, owners of Purdue Pharma, to pay $6 billion to recovery centers and victim families across the country. However, the justices rejected the agreement because it would have protected the Sackler family from any civil lawsuits related to OxyContin. Under the settlement, New Hampshire alone would have received $46 million.
Scarpone, who was one of 20 members of the victims’ council that spoke to the Supreme Court and the Sackler family during the settlement process, emphasized the importance of the settlement money. “That settlement money was going to help so many victims, and it was going to help abate the crisis, and we worked so hard just to have it taken away from us,” she said. Despite the setback, she remains determined to continue the fight, even if it takes another four years.
Edward Neiger, the attorney representing Scarpone and other victims, highlighted the impact of the court’s ruling. “Right now, they are not slated to get a single penny,” Neiger said. “The $750 million they were supposed to get, the Supreme Court just blew that up.”
In a statement, Purdue Pharma described the news as “heart-crushing.” The company reiterated its commitment to using settlement dollars for opioid abatement and transforming the company into a force for good. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, more than 81,000 Americans died from an opioid overdose in 2022, a figure that has more than quadrupled since data collection began in 1999.
Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority, explained that the Sacklers sought greater relief than a bankruptcy discharge normally affords. “The Sacklers seek greater relief than a bankruptcy discharge normally affords, for they hope to extinguish even claims for wrongful death and fraud, and they seek to do so without putting anything close to all their assets on the table,” Gorsuch wrote. He added that nothing in the bankruptcy code authorizes such relief.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in his dissent, warned of the devastating impact the decision would have on thousands of victims of the opioid epidemic. “As a result, opioid victims are now deprived of the substantial monetary recovery that they long fought for and finally secured after years of litigation,” he wrote. Kavanaugh urged Congress to amend U.S. bankruptcy law to address the chaos that will ensue from the court’s ruling.
The case dealt with the fate of Purdue Pharma and its leaders, who produced and promoted OxyContin, a highly addictive drug that played a significant role in the opioid crisis. The Sackler family had agreed to pay $6 billion to families and states as part of an agreement to wind down Purdue Pharma. In exchange, the family would be protected from future civil liability claims.
Purdue Pharma marketed OxyContin as a safer and less addictive painkiller, encouraging doctors to prescribe it for longer periods and more routine injuries. The drug’s success fueled the Sackler fortune, and the family became known for their philanthropy. However, lawsuits and news reports revealed that the family continued to promote OxyContin even after learning of its addictive properties. Many Americans became addicted, and some turned to heroin and other opioids when they could no longer fill their prescriptions.
From 1999 to 2021, nearly 645,000 people died from an opioid overdose, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Supreme Court’s decision has left many families and victims feeling abandoned and without recourse.
In a statement, Purdue Pharma said the ruling would require the company to renew efforts to reach out to creditors and pursue a resolution that delivers billions of dollars for opioid abatement. “Today’s ruling is heart-crushing because it invalidates a settlement supported by nearly all of our creditors – including states, local governments, personal injury victims, schools, and hospitals – that would have delivered billions of dollars for victim compensation, opioid crisis abatement, and overdose rescue and addiction treatment medicines,” the company said.
Supporters of the bankruptcy argued that the years-long process had gone on long enough and was unlikely to yield additional money from the Sackler family. The vast majority of known current opioid victims and their families supported the agreement. However, the Justice Department argued that the settlement was a raw deal for victims, particularly potential future victims.
A federal appeals court in New York had approved the deal last year, but the Supreme Court paused the arrangement in August to review the case. The U.S. Bankruptcy Trustee, an arm of the Justice Department, argued that the bankruptcy law does not permit protecting the Sackler family from being sued. The Biden administration had argued that negotiations could resume and perhaps lead to a better deal if the court stopped the current agreement.
The Supreme Court’s decision has left many families and victims in limbo, uncertain of what the future holds. As the nation continues to grapple with the opioid epidemic, the fight for justice and compensation for victims remains ongoing.
Source: WMUR, CNN, AP
