Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement • Hacker News Board

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#221

Post by s1artibartfast » Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 6:46 PM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #208

s1artibartfast wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may find the money a pittance, but the victims decided otherwise. It seems the case that the interests of the victims/plaintiffs (e.g. compensation) may be different than the public at large (e.g. punishment). If so, perhaps the interests of the public should be pursued by a different avenue than the civil case of the victims, which requires superseding the agency of the victims.

> You may find the money a pittance, but the victims decided otherwise. When you say 'the victims' are you implying they all agreed to this? So they are all okay with giving up their individual right to sue for damages? You make several points which imply that this is some kind of consensus position that everyone is okay with. That's the root of the problem, though -- this settlement in no way addresses the damage to…

The case and settlement has almost nothing to do with solving the problem at a societal level, with either outcome being negligible.

Real progress would involve systemic changes to the treatment and causes of drug addiction, as well as medical treatment philosophy.

To hang the opioid epidemic on perdue is a gross oversimplification, essentially a scapegoating of a multifactorial problem. Perdue sold the same pills in Europe, but the US has an overdose rate 2,000% higher.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#222

Post by robnado » Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 6:47 PM UTC

jpalawaga wrote: post #218

This is the only reasonable outcome... you can't deny some people justice just because other people think it's fine. The sacklers have done immeasurable damage to the country. All of their wealth should be removed. Their foundation should be dismantled and used to fund damage and mental health services for addicts of the opioid crisis that they went on to create. And perhaps some of the individual pushers/purveyors o…

Agreed, they should be made an example of. Everyone involved in the fraud of getting this medication approved and then marketed to millions of people should face a fair trial and should be made an example of if found guilty. There is no reason that this medication should have been approved or marketed the way it was, especially considering what the medical community already knew about opioids and the harm they can cause.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#223

Post by bradford » Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 6:47 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #176

bradford wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does anyone find it strange that this is described as a loss for the victims? I can see it going both ways, yes: this means that 6 billion dollars are not immediately available for compensation. On the other hand, certain states (Washington was one, if I recall) argued that 6 billion dollars was such a pitifully small amount (relative to the damage done) that they declined to accept compensation in hopes that futur…

> certain states (Washington was one, if I recall) argued that 6 billion dollars was such a pitifully small amount (relative to the damage done) that they declined to accept compensation As the dissent notes, “all 50 state Attorneys General have signed on to this plan.” The holdouts were “a small group of Canadian creditors and one lone individual.” I always thought of the Sackler carve-out as a scam. But the dissent…

> As the dissent notes, “all 50 state Attorneys General have signed on to this plan.”

Thanks for the correction! I must have read about Washington States objection a while ago, and been unaware of a change in their position (since I first read about it)

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#224

Post by polotics » Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 6:51 PM UTC

robnado wrote: post #222

jpalawaga wrote: post #218

This is the only reasonable outcome... you can't deny some people justice just because other people think it's fine. The sacklers have done immeasurable damage to the country. All of their wealth should be removed. Their foundation should be dismantled and used to fund damage and mental health services for addicts of the opioid crisis that they went on to create. And perhaps some of the individual pushers/purveyors o…

Agreed, they should be made an example of. Everyone involved in the fraud of getting this medication approved and then marketed to millions of people should face a fair trial and should be made an example of if found guilty. There is no reason that this medication should have been approved or marketed the way it was, especially considering what the medical community already knew about opioids and the harm they can ca…

Considering the three strikes rule and other extremely punitive judgement against drug offenders, how are the sacklers still not in solitary?

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#225

Post by ein0p » Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 6:52 PM UTC

legitster wrote: post #174

EnergyAmy wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect you misinterpreted what they said. We should be putting guilty people in jail, even if they're rich and powerful.

[flagged]

Are you a part of the Sackler family? Otherwise I don’t see how you could have misinterpreted what I said.

Tell me, how many rich people went to jail for the fraud that caused the 2008 financial crisis? See what I mean now?

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#226

Post by esd_g0d » Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 6:55 PM UTC

What share of the guild do the medical providers that prescribed the opioids to their patients have? There would be no opioid crisis if none were willing to do it.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#227

Post by tunesmith » Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 6:57 PM UTC

petesergeant wrote: post #217

> Justices Kavanaugh, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Roberts disagreed Fascinating split

Strong language, too, against the majority that includes Jackson ("Brown Jackson"?).

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#228

Post by jimbob45 » Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 6:57 PM UTC

realce wrote: post #4

>The court on a 5-4 vote ruled that the bankruptcy court did not have the authority to release the Sackler family members from legal claims made by opioid victims. As part of the deal, the family, which controlled the company, had agreed to pay $6 billion that could be used to settle opioid-related claims, but only in return for a complete release from any liability in future cases. Is this actually a positive outcom…

The next likely step to this will be how it affects the future hypothetical (but almost certain) trial of Boeing execs. Depending on what you want that to look like, then this was either positive or negative.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#229

Post by legitster » Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 7:00 PM UTC

jpalawaga wrote: post #218

This is the only reasonable outcome... you can't deny some people justice just because other people think it's fine. The sacklers have done immeasurable damage to the country. All of their wealth should be removed. Their foundation should be dismantled and used to fund damage and mental health services for addicts of the opioid crisis that they went on to create. And perhaps some of the individual pushers/purveyors o…

The Sacklers were absolved of financial liability, not criminal. A DA that thought there was a strong enough case could have brought charges this whole time irrespective of the settlement agreement.

> Their foundation should be dismantled and used to fund damage and mental health services for addicts of the opioid crisis that they went on to create.

Part of the settlement agreement was that they were going to turn Purdue into a treatment organization. But right now it's back to the drawing board and plaintiffs will have to pursue separate and much harder cases to get reparations directly from all the individual members of the Sackler family.

Re: Supreme Court blocks controversial Purdue Pharma opioid settlement

#230

Post by ensignavenger » Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 7:02 PM UTC

robnado wrote: post #222

jpalawaga wrote: post #218

This is the only reasonable outcome... you can't deny some people justice just because other people think it's fine. The sacklers have done immeasurable damage to the country. All of their wealth should be removed. Their foundation should be dismantled and used to fund damage and mental health services for addicts of the opioid crisis that they went on to create. And perhaps some of the individual pushers/purveyors o…

Agreed, they should be made an example of. Everyone involved in the fraud of getting this medication approved and then marketed to millions of people should face a fair trial and should be made an example of if found guilty. There is no reason that this medication should have been approved or marketed the way it was, especially considering what the medical community already knew about opioids and the harm they can ca…

The immunity deal on the table here was for civil litigation, not criminal trials. The Sackler family can still declare bankruptcy on their own, they just can't use the bankruptcy of their company to extend protection to themselves- which does make sense. But nothing that was proposed would have shielded them from criminal prosecution.