Purdue Pharma's $7B Opioid Settlement Plan Could Get Votes From Victims and Cities
Purdue Pharma's $7 billion-plus plan to settle thousands of lawsuits over the toll of opioids will go before a judge Friday, potentially setting up votes on whether to accept it for local governments, people who became addicted to the drug, and other groups.
This month, 49 states announced they have signed on to the proposal. Only Oklahoma, which has a separate settlement with the company, is not involved. US Bankruptcy Court Judge Sean Lane could decide as soon as Friday whether to advance the nationwide settlement, which was hammered out in negotiations between the company, groups that have sued, and representatives of members of the Sackler family who own the company. If Lane moves the plan forward as it's been presented, government entities, emergency room doctors, insurers, families of children born into withdrawal from the powerful prescription painkiller, individual victims and their families, and others would have until Sept. 30 to vote on whether to accept the deal.
The settlement is a way to avoid trials with claims from states alone that total more than $2 trillion in damages. If approved, the settlement would be among the largest in a wave of lawsuits over the past decade as governments and others sought to hold drugmakers, wholesalers, and pharmacies accountable for the opioid epidemic that started rising in the years after OxyContin hit the market in 1996. The other settlements together are worth about $50 billion, and most of the money is to be used to combat the crisis. In the early 2000s, most opioid deaths were linked to prescription drugs, including OxyContin. Since then, heroin and then illicitly produced fentanyl became the biggest killers. In some years, the class of drugs was linked to more than 80,000 deaths, but that number dropped sharply last year.
Last year, the US Supreme Court rejected a version of Purdue's proposed settlement. The court found it was improper to protect members of the Sackler family from lawsuits over opioids even though they themselves were not filing for bankruptcy protection. In the new version, groups that don't opt in to the settlement would still have the right to sue members of the wealthy family, whose name once adorned museum galleries around the world and programs at several prestigious US universities.
Under the plan, the Sackler family members would give up ownership of Purdue. They resigned from the company's board and stopped receiving distributions from its funds before the company's initial bankruptcy filing in 2019. The remaining entity would get a new name, and its profits would be dedicated to battling the epidemic. Most of the money would go to state and local governments to address the nation's addiction and overdose crisis, but potentially more than $850 million would go directly to individual victims. That makes it different from the other major settlements. The payments would not begin until after a hearing, likely in November, during which Judge Lane would be asked to approve the entire plan if enough of the affected parties agree.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Arabiya
27 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
Supreme Court Widens Court Options for Vaping Companies Pushing Back Against FDA Rules
The Supreme Court sided with e-cigarette companies on Friday in a ruling making it easier to sue over Food and Drug Administration decisions blocking their products from the multibillion-dollar vaping market. The 7–2 opinion comes as companies push back against a yearslong federal regulatory crackdown on electronic cigarettes. It's expected to give the companies more control over which judges hear lawsuits filed against the agency. The justices went the other way on vaping in an April decision siding with the FDA in a ruling upholding a sweeping block on most sweet-flavored vapes instituted after a spike in youth vaping. The current case was filed by R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co., which had sold a line of popular berry and menthol-flavored vaping products before the agency started regulating the market under the Tobacco Control Act in 2016. 'The agency refused to authorize the company's Vuse Alto products, an order that sounded the death knell for a significant portion of the e-cigarette market,' Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote in the majority opinion. The company is based in North Carolina and typically would have been limited to challenging the FDA in a court there or in the agency's home base of Washington. Instead, it joined forces with Texas businesses that sell the products and sued there. The conservative 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the lawsuit to go forward, finding that anyone whose business is hurt by the FDA decision can sue. The agency appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that R.J. Reynolds was trying to find a court friendly to its arguments–a practice often called 'judge shopping.' The justices, though, found that the law does allow other businesses affected by the FDA decisions, like e-cigarette sellers, to sue in their home states. In a dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, said she would have sided with the agency and limited where the cases can be filed. The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids called the majority decision 'disappointing,' saying it would allow manufacturers to 'judge shop,' though it said the companies will still have to contend with the Supreme Court's April decision. Attorney Ryan Watson, who represented R.J. Reynolds, said that the court recognized that 'agency decisions can have devastating downstream effects on retailers and other businesses,' and the decision 'ensures that the courthouse doors are not closed to them.'
Al Arabiya
27 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
Judge says he will order Columbia University protester Mahmoud Khalil freed from detention
A federal judge says he'll order Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil released from immigration detention. Judge Michael Farbiarz made the ruling from the bench in federal court in New Jersey on Friday. Lawyers for the Columbia graduate had asked a federal judge to immediately release him on bail from a Louisiana jail or else transfer him to New Jersey where he can be closer to his wife and newborn son. Khalil was the first arrest under President Donald Trump's crackdown on students who joined campus protests against Israel's devastating war in Gaza. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said Khalil must be expelled from the country because his continued presence could harm American foreign policy. The same judge had ruled earlier that the government can continue to detain the legal US resident based on allegations that he lied on his green card application. Khalil disputes the accusations that he wasn't forthcoming on the application. The judge previously determined that Khalil couldn't continue being held based on the US secretary of state's determination that he could harm American foreign policy. Khalil, a legal US resident, was detained on March 8 at his apartment building in Manhattan over his participation in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. His lawyers say the Trump administration is simply trying to crack down on free speech. Khalil isn't accused of breaking any laws during the protests at Columbia. The international affairs graduate student served as a negotiator and spokesperson for student activists. He wasn't among the demonstrators arrested, but his prominence in news coverage and willingness to speak publicly made him a target of critics. The Trump administration has argued that noncitizens who participate in such demonstrations should be expelled from the country, as it considers their views antisemitic.
Al Arabiya
28 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
As Musk's 'robotaxi' rollout approaches, Democratic lawmakers in Texas try to throw up a roadblock
A group of Democratic lawmakers in Texas is asking Elon Musk to delay the planned rollout of driverless robotaxis in the state this weekend to assure that the vehicles are safe. In a letter, seven state legislators asked Tesla to wait until September when a new law takes effect that will require several checks before autonomous vehicles can be deployed without a human in the driver's seat. Tesla is slated to begin testing a dozen of what it calls robotaxis for paying customers on Sunday in a limited area of Austin, Texas. 'We are formally requesting that Tesla delay autonomous robotaxi operations until the new law takes effect on September 1, 2025,' the letter from Wednesday, June 18, reads. 'We believe this is in the best interest of both public safety and building public trust in Tesla's operations.' It's not clear if the letter will have much impact. Republicans have been a dominant majority in the Texas Legislature for more than 20 years. State lawmakers and Republican Gov. Greg Abbott have generally embraced Musk and the jobs and investment he has brought to Texas from his SpaceX rocket program on the coast to his Tesla factory in Austin. The company, which is headquartered in Austin, did not respond immediately to a request for comment from The Associated Press. The law will require companies to secure approval from the state motor vehicles department to operate autonomous cars with passengers. That approval, in turn, would depend on sufficient proof that the cars won't pose a high risk to others if the self-driving system breaks down, among other reassurances. Companies would also have to file detailed plans for how first responders should handle the cars if there is a problem, such as an accident. The letter asked Tesla to assure the legislators it has met all the requirements of the law even if it decides to go ahead with the test run this weekend. The letter was earlier reported by Reuters. Musk has made the robotaxi program a priority at Tesla, and a failure would likely be highly damaging to the company's stock, which has already tumbled 20 percent this year. Musk's political views and his affiliation with the Trump administration have drastically reduced sales of Tesla, particularly in Europe, where Musk's endorsement of Germany's far-right Alternative for Germany party in February's election drew broad condemnation. Tesla shares bottomed out in March and have rebounded somewhat in recent months. Much of the rise reflects optimism that robotaxis will not only be deployed without a hitch but that the service will quickly expand to other cities and eventually dominate the self-driving cab business. Rival Waymo is already picking up passengers in Austin and several other cities and recently boasted of surpassing 10 million paid rides. In afternoon trading Friday, Tesla shares were largely unchanged at 320.
