Menu
The latest ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has cast a spotlight on the intersection of the art world and big pharma, a nexus embodied by the Sackler family’s longstanding involvement with Purdue Pharma. The ruling, which permits the family to purchase personal immunity from civil lawsuits related to OxyContin by paying $6 billion, has sent ripples through both the legal and art communities.
The Sackler name has long been associated with philanthropic contributions to some of the world’s leading art institutions. However, their association with Purdue Pharma, the pharmaceutical company under scrutiny for its aggressive marketing of the opioid OxyContin, has significantly tarnished their reputation.
The Court of Appeals’ ruling allows the Sackler family to protect themselves against present and future civil lawsuits tied to OxyContin, in exchange for a whopping $6 billion. This protection, more common for corporations filing bankruptcy than individuals, marks an unusual development in legal history.
Criminal suits pose a distinct threat in comparison to civil suits, particularly in the scope of potential penalties. While civil suits primarily seek financial compensation for damages, criminal suits can result in fines, probation, or even imprisonment.
In the context of the opioid crisis, if any members of the Sackler family were to be found criminally liable for the aggressive marketing of OxyContin, they could face severe consequences. For example, under the United States Federal Sentencing Guidelines, if convicted of a crime such as fraud or racketeering in connection to the marketing and sales of OxyContin, they could be looking at years in prison.
Purdue Pharma, based in Stamford, Connecticut, was driven to bankruptcy in 2019 due to an avalanche of lawsuits. These lawsuits were lodged by various stakeholders – individuals, states, tribes – alleging the company provided kickbacks to doctors who over-prescribed OxyContin while concealing its addictive potential.
In 2021, a bankruptcy ruling allowed the Sacklers to pay $4.5 million for legal protection from civil suits. However, this decision was promptly overturned in a federal court. The judge cited the Sacklers’ withdrawal of over $10 billion between 2008 and 2018, amid the peak of the opioid crisis, with a substantial portion kept in offshore accounts, inaccessible to US authorities.
This recent ruling aims to benefit the victims of the opioid crisis and their families. Unlike the previous 2021 ruling, it has not sparked significant opposition.
As per the settlement, Purdue Pharma will be restructured into Knoa Pharma. The Sacklers, having disassociated from Purdue since 2018, will play no role in this new entity. Managed by a public board, Knoa Pharma will continue to manufacture OxyContin and other drugs, including those to counteract and treat addiction. The company’s profits will be allocated towards funding addiction treatment centers and restitution.
This ruling marks a new chapter in the narrative of the Sackler family, Purdue Pharma, and their controversial role in the opioid crisis. As the saga continues to unfold, its impact on both the victims of the opioid crisis and the prestigious art institutions formerly supported by the Sackler’s philanthropy is yet to be fully determined.
