A yearslong legal battle over Purdue Pharma’s role in the nation’s deadly opioid epidemic is approaching a climactic end, as lawyers from nearly every side urged a bankruptcy judge Friday to approve a sweeping settlement that would resolve thousands of lawsuits against the OxyContin maker.
According to The Associated Press, if U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane signs off, it could close one of the most consequential and emotional chapters in the nationwide fight to hold Purdue and members of the Sackler family accountable for an opioid crisis tied to roughly 900,000 deaths since 1999.
The hearing — now in its third day — marks the latest step in a saga that began six years ago when Purdue filed for bankruptcy under the weight of litigation seeking damages that eventually climbed into the trillions.
Throughout the process, cities, states, tribes, hospitals, victims, and the Sacklers themselves have clashed over whether true justice is possible in a bankruptcy court designed more for restructuring finances than delivering moral accountability.
A previous settlement collapsed last year after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Sackler family members could not be granted blanket immunity from future opioid lawsuits.
The new proposal removes that protection; those who decline to participate in the agreement would still be free to sue family members, many of whom hold assets in offshore trusts.
But this time, the coalition is far more united. Out of more than 54,000 personal injury victims who voted on the plan, just 218 rejected it.
Still, emotions boiled over Thursday as several objectors addressed the court — some interrupting the judge — to argue that victims deserve a larger share of the money or that the Sacklers should face criminal charges.
Judge Lane reminded them that criminal accountability is outside the bankruptcy court’s authority, though prosecutors remain free to pursue such cases.
Pamela Bartz Halaschak, whose husband became addicted after being prescribed OxyContin, told the court the deal falls short. “The natural laws of karma suggest the Sacklers and Purdue Pharma should pay for what they have done,” she said.
Under the terms of the proposed settlement, Sackler family members would pay up to $7 billion and relinquish ownership of Purdue, which would be restructured under a new name and run by independent overseers who would dedicate all future profits to opioid-abatement efforts.
Family members would also be barred from attaching their names to institutions in return for donations and prohibited from involvement in opioid-related businesses overseas. A trove of company documents — including materials typically shielded by attorney-client privilege — would be released to the public.
Unlike many of the other major opioid settlements totaling about $50 billion nationwide, Purdue’s plan includes direct payments to individuals harmed by its products. Roughly $850 million would go to victims, with more than $100 million set aside for children born with opioid withdrawal symptoms.
Lawyers estimate that those who can prove at least six months of Purdue prescriptions may receive about $16,000, while shorter-term patients could receive around $8,000 before legal fees.
Some families say that isn’t nearly enough. “Tell me how you guys can sleep at night knowing people are going to get so little money they can’t do anything with it,” said Laureen Ferrante of Staten Island.
Most settlement funds would be directed to state and local governments for opioid-abatement programs. Overdose deaths have declined in recent years — a trend experts attribute in part to the impact of earlier settlement dollars.
Judge Lane is expected to rule after the closing arguments conclude.
