Massachusetts State Attorney General Maura Healey initially sued Purdue Pharma in June 2018 on behalf of 670 of the state’s residents who were prescribed the company’s opiate OxyContin, became addicted and eventually overdosed.
“By the mid-2000s, there was simply no debate about whether or not these pills were causing chaos, heartache and death across the Commonwealth and across the United States,” Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker said in a 2018 news conference.
Despite arduous years in court, few were appeased by the outcome of this prolonged legal battle and an emerging victor was apparent: the Sackler family.
In the early 1900s, Isaac Sackler and his wife Sophie immigrated to the United States from Ukraine and Poland. Upon their arrival in America, they established a grocery business and had three sons: Arthur, Mortimer, and Raymond Sackler. The Sackler sons all became psychiatrists and were credited with progressive advances, such as pioneering the medicinal techniques that contributed to the cease of lobotomies and arguing against the racial segregation of blood banks.
In 1952, the brothers bought a pharmaceutical company by the name of Purdue-Frederick. Raymond Sackler and Mortimer Sackler took on managerial roles within Purdue, while Arthur Sackler expanded the role of pharmaceutical advertising within the medical sector. Upon Arthur’s death in 1987, his share of the company was sold to his brothers and the corporation was renamed Purdue Pharma. Over the years, many of Raymond Sackler and Mortimer Sackler’s descendants have worked within Purdue Pharma or held board positions.
Purdue expanded into the booming, lucrative pain management field in the early 1990s. In 1996, Purdue Pharma rolled out what would become its most profitable drug yet, OxyContin, a slow-release form of oxycodone. OxyContin is widely considered by many to have precipitated the current raging opioid epidemic. Over the years, OxyContin has generated an estimated $30 billion in revenue for Purdue, according to the House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Reform. Furthermore, bankruptcy filings have revealed that between 2008 and 2017, $10 billion were transferred out of the company for the Sacklers’ gain. While the Sacklers defend the legitimacy of the transfer, a Department of Justice investigation concluded that the withdrawal was “made with the intent to hinder future creditors.”
In 2018, over half a dozen of Sacklers descended from Raymond and Mortimer Sackler were named as defendants in the case against Purdue for deceptively promoting OxyContin as relatively nonaddictive and encouraging overprescription of the drug, which led to the overdose-related deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans. Purdue and the Sacklers have been investigated by the DOJ and named in thousands of lawsuits filed by state and local governments, Native American tribes, hospitals and individuals. There has been some dispute concerning whether the Sacklers should be considered accountable for the actions of this large pharmaceutical company. However, the Sacklers appear to have been intensively involved in the management of the corporation, and according to AG Healy, there is an abundance of evidence that displays “the direct control that they exercised over sales and marketing.”
Purdue Pharma has pled guilty to multiple felonies, including defrauding regulators and paying doctors illegal kickbacks to prompt prescription. The company has also filed for bankruptcy and proposed a plan to end Sackler ownership. It is worthy to note that, while the company pled guilty to these charges, no individuals have entered guilty pleas, leaving no one to truly accept responsibility.
Throughout the proceedings, the Sacklers have maintained their innocence and insisted they behaved neither illegally nor unethically. The bankruptcy deal further alleviates the Sacklers from any responsibility pertaining to the opioid epidemic. U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Robert Drain ruled on Sept. 1 to dissolve the $10 billion Purdue Pharma and shift assets to a new public benefit company void of Sackler involvement. The new company is to be operated by a trust aimed at abating the opioid epidemic. After nearly three years of depositions, negotiations and chamber meetings, the court proceedings concluded on Sept. 1, 2021.
The final settlement included up to $10 billion to be divided amongst victims, states, the federal government and corporate creditor groups; $4.5 billion of this amount will come from the Sackler family. More contentiously, the plan also shields the Sackler family from future prosecution pertaining to opioid litigation by way of nonconsensual third-party release, absolving them of any possible verdict of guilt in the 400 now dissolved civil suits in which they are named as defendants. Several states opposed this portion of the deal, and Congressional Democrats proposed legislation to prevent this legal release, encouraging the DOJ to appeal the case. However, these measures faltered due to a lack of support.
Bankruptcy court should not serve as a safe haven for Purdue and the Sacklers. Most bankruptcy courts oppose nonconsensual third-party releases like the one the family obtained. Purdue Pharma, however, was incredibly particular in seeking its bankruptcy hearing in a court that would allow such a release. Prior to the bankruptcy filing, the company changed its corporate address to White Plains, New York, a location in which it has never conducted any business. The city houses only one bankruptcy judge, who had previously ruled in favor of nonconsensual third-party releases. The current deal irrevocably exempts the Sacklers, and over 400 entities and individuals with which the family is involved, from all claims.
Of the $10 billion agreed upon in the settlement, the victims afflicted by addiction and death will receive only $750 million, with the rest going to the other parties. The group most affected by this tragedy is being disregarded within a system that protects and serves only the ultra-affluent; the injured party stands to receive only 7.5% of the settlement amount, with payments ranging from $3,000 to $48,000. Even the upper end of this range serves as a meager compensation for the loss of a valuable human life. To add to the injustice, the settlement deprives the victims of the chance to press charges and be heard in court. Although nine states and the District of Columbia, as well as two branches of the DOJ, have condemned the outcome of this trial and labelled it unconstitutional, there remains little that can be done within the confines of the current system, short of an unlikely criminal conviction.
Perhaps the most appalling revelation amidst this misfortune is that the Sacklers are ceding only $4.5 billion of their $11 billion fortune. The principle of this court ruling signifies the tolerance of a wealthy family’s reckless marketing of a lethal and addictive drug responsible for thousands of deaths, simply to further their self-serving pursuits of financial benefit. The payment is also structured in a manner that permits the Sacklers to pay their fine over the course of nine years, with the largest volume of these payments being made in the latter portion of this time.
The nature of this deal ensures the family will recoup their expenses through interest and investments without sacrificing any of their principal. The New York Times predicts by the conclusion of their payments in 2030, the Sackler family “will probably be richer than they are today.” The fact the Sacklers will maintain the greater portion of their billions and remain among the wealthiest families in the world is nothing short of insulting to the victims of the opioid epidemic endangered by this family’s impetuous actions relating to the distribution of OxyContin.
The settlement yielded little accountability and provided no requite for the victims. While the Sacklers and Purdue Pharma may be guilty in the court of public opinion, the trial failed to provide systemic, tangible consequences that will be of any significance to the family. The Sacklers are indeed dancing off into the sunset.