Supreme Court blocks $6 billion Purdue Pharma Settlement

The Supreme Court on Thursday blocked Purdue Pharma from going forward with bankruptcy proceedings, which the Biden administration has called an “unprecedented” arrangement that would ultimately offer the Sackler family broad protection from opioid-related civil claims. In agreeing to pause the settlement, the court also said it would take up the case and hear arguments this December. CNN’s Jean Casarez and Joan Biskupic report

Cnn: The Supreme Court has blocked Purdue Pharma, the Max manufacturer of OxyContin, From going forward with bankruptcy proceedings and a $6.6 billion settlement, this was part of an arrangement that would ultimately offer the Sackler family, the founders of Purdue Pharma, broad protection from opioid related civil claims, the Supreme Court says they will now take up this case and hear arguments about it in December.

Jean. What exactly was in this settlement?

Jean Casarez: First of all, when it began in 2019, when the bankruptcy was declared by Purdue Pharma. All of the civil suits, and there were so many around the country against the Sacklers, against Purdue Pharma, they all were channeled into bankruptcy action. That was one of the first things they did. And people need to realize how huge this was. 

This involved states This involved counties, this involved townships, this involved tribal nations all over the country. And I remember being in the courtroom, and it was filled with attorneys, attorneys by phone all over the country. So they started negotiating. 

They’ve been negotiating for years on this since 2019. And they finally determined, and there were a handful of states that were opposed to this. but it was really symbolic at the end. They decided that what would happen is that the Sacklers would pay out approximately $6, billion. to individual claimants, to states, to abatement procedures involving crisis medications that could be given to people, And in lieu of that, and their names would be taken off buildings around the country. Also, that was part of it. 

But in lieu of that, they would not face civil suits going forward because the money would be going toward everything that I just described. And here’s an impact of this. Those people that were the victims and that they wanted money and $6,000,000,000 is going to all of that. This will be stopped in its tracks. So no one, no community, no abatement proceedings, no medications, will be going for the short term to those entities that’s so needed.

Cnn: Joan, are you surprised that the US Supreme Court has not only blocked this settlement that had been agreed upon, but that they’re also gonna take up the case.

Joan Biskupic: Those are pretty dramatic terms that Jean just outlined, and the solicitor general of the United States actually used them in her arguments to try to get the Supreme Court to intervene to say this is a very exceptional agreement unprecedented, the scope of it is something that, you know, maybe should be blocked. And, in encouraging the justices to take it up, say, look at lower courts are divided, out there on situations when companies, when parties can be released from liability. 

So it is, in some ways, surprising that they’re intervening at this stage, but this is the most crucial stage. and they have set it on a pretty fast track. They’ve ordered a fairly quick briefing schedule, and the case would be heard in early December with a resolution, Jake, probably by the end of June of next year. So, you know, when you think of the opioid addiction crisis in America and the responsibility of Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family, this is a pretty unprecedented settlement. So that’s why the Supreme Court has intervened at this point.

Cnn: Dave Yost (R) Ohio, is 1 of the 8 states, as well as Washington, DC that are part of the  $6 billion settlement, and you might remember Ohio is, of course, tragically one of the epicenters of the opioid crisis. general use, thanks for joining us. 

Did you want the Supreme Court to take up the case, or or did you want them to allow the settlement to move forward?

Dave Yost (R) Ohio: We wanted the settlement to move forward. This is money that’s not flowing to individual claimant families. It’s not coming back equally important to our communities and to our states to fight back against this avalanche of addiction that was architected by the Sacklers. 

Cnn: I’m gonna ask you a question I’ve never asked anybody before. What’s the best argument for the people who disagree with you? The best argument being made by, for instance, a solicitor general who wants the Supreme Court to review this case, they disagree with the settlement. I realize I’m asking you to state something you don’t agree with, but what is their best case?

Dave Yost (R) Ohio: I think there’s probably 2 arguments on the other side. The the first is that there’s a lack of due process in the in the, discharging. That is just fundamentally unfair to let the Sacklers walk away. The problem with that is that under the law, we can get to Purdue Pharma. The individual, family money that’s behind that is much more difficult legally in most of our states. The other issue, which is kind of a policy issue, is what do we do with these mass torts that are so massive their existential lawsuits, and to maximize the recovery for the wrongs done, you have to have some kind of means of marshaling all these claims. and this is gonna be an interesting argument at the Supreme Court.

Cnn: And your argument is correct me if I’m wrong. There are people in Ohio and and the other states who need help now, who need that money now, organizations that need to help people who are still suffering, in this epidemic that continues to take thousands of lives a year. Is that right?

Dave Yost (R) Ohio: That’s absolutely correct. And as the Court of Appeals said, bankruptcy is a creature of compromises. It’s a messy process of competing interests.

Cnn: We’ve seen some preliminary data showing that drug overdose deaths have leveled off, but still, more than 100,000 Americans are losing their lives from overdoses nationally. Most of them, I believe, are opioids, how is Ohio working to alleviate the crisis?

Dave Yost (R) Ohio: Well, we have a coalition, we call it the one Ohio Foundation that has all of our local governments and the state government. We’re sharing the money from these various lawsuits to bring it back to the local level for treatment, for prediction, for prevention, which is for enforcement. because this war is fought on the ground of our streets, of our cities, and our counties, and it’s so important to get this money flowing. It’s been since 2019, that this bankruptcy proceedings have been going on. I guess the best thing I could say about today’s decision to cure the case is at least they set it for December.

 

Cnn: Can you imagine if terrorists killed 100,000 Americans a year, but this is us doing it to ourselves. Ohio Attorney General Davios. Thank you so much for your time. As always, we appreciate it.

 

Source: CNN