The decision means thousands of plaintiffs who have sued Purdue and the Sackler family for the company’s role in igniting the opioid epidemic will likely see delayed payments.
Purdue is seeking to resolve the lawsuits through bankruptcy court, versus the traditional court system. Under the deal, the Sacklers would pay billions in personal wealth to state and local governments affected by the opioid epidemic. In exchange for that money, the Sacklers and their associates — many of whom haven’t filed for bankruptcy — would be granted “third-party releases,” which would block them from future opioid lawsuits.
The Supreme Court’s order was in response to a request from the U.S. Justice Department to block the deal. U.S. officials have called the plan flawed and unconstitutional, saying it allows the Sacklers to take advantage of legal protections meant for debtors in “financial distress,” according to the Times.
A Purdue Pharma spokesperson told the Times it was “confident in the legality” of the bankruptcy plan, while a representative for the Sackler family did not respond to a request for comment.
The justices will hear arguments in December on whether the deal can proceed.
At the Becker's 11th Annual IT + Revenue Cycle Conference: The Future of AI & Digital Health, taking place September 14–17 in Chicago, healthcare executives and digital leaders from across the country will come together to explore how AI, interoperability, cybersecurity, and revenue cycle innovation are transforming care delivery, strengthening financial performance, and driving the next era of digital health. Apply for complimentary registration now.
