Ok, still a ways to go before celebration, but we’re trending in the right direction. So, I’m choosing optimism.

  • Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The Supreme Court on Thursday blocked Purdue Pharma from going forward with bankruptcy proceedings, which the Biden administration has called an “unprecedented” arrangement that would ultimately offer the Sackler family broad protection from opioid-related civil claims.

    The case arose after the reorganization in bankruptcy of OxyContin manufacturer Purdue Pharma – stemming from litigation arising from claims over its role in fueling the opioid addiction crisis.

    Until recently, Purdue was controlled by the Sackler family, who withdrew billions of dollars from the company before it filed for bankruptcy.

    They’re so beyond the “Eat the Rich” side of things. They’ve committed so much evil and blood on their hands

    • Zorque@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s still time, the SC blocked it so they could consider the case, not because they actually have a problem with it.

    • Greyghoster@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Given the amount of time that the justices spend holidaying with billionaires what’s the bet that they side with their mates?

  • Wirrvogel@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Just for a comparison:

    Fatal opioid overdoses and opioid use disorder cost the United States $1.02 trillion in 2017. The most complete accounting to date of America’s opioid crisis was released by CDC in the journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence. Costs for spending on health care, opioid use disorder treatment, criminal justice, and lost work productivity, as well as estimates of cost for lost quality of life and lives lost were computed in this study.

    And they have the audacity to say how much these $6 billion will help and how dare to delay that help. That’s less than a drop in the ocean.

    • BaronVonBort@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think that’s the thing that got me - the spokesperson’s response. “They are withholding help…” like yeah from the damage that your company (and the family who ran it) inflicted and is trying to escape any actual responsibility from.

      I hope that they reverse the immunity. I don’t hold much hope from this court but I can light a candle for this one.

      • ZombieTheZombieCat@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Rehab costs about $30k for 28 days. As if the hundreds of thousands of deaths and overdoses per year weren’t enough. Suboxone is $700+ per month just for the pills, not including seeing the doctor monthly and random drug tests. Methadone’s not cheap either. Then there’s secondary health issues like sepsis, MRSA, HIV, hepatitis, heart problems, pregnancy issues, withdrawal, DUI injuries/deaths etc.

        The list goes on and on and on and on. I wouldn’t be surprised if a trillion barely covered it.

  • ZooGuru@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The fact that Purdue is saying “this is the best plan and everyone says so” tells me all I need to know. I just hope that when the case is heard, the outcome will better AND the Sack-of-shit-ler family is held accountable. You can’t claim ignorance on the opioid epidemic and run a business the way they did to directly profit from it.

  • weasel5053@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    The one thing that can be predicted with absolute certainty is that the Sackler family is going to be fine.

  • CapitalismsRefugee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    What the fuck? The Supreme Court made a decision that protects American citizens? Did they misunderstand the question?

      • YaaAsantewaa@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        AA was not racially biased, it was necessary and it still is

        “After California banned race-conscious admissions in 1996, the proportions of Black and Latino students at UCLA, one of the most elite school’s in the state’s system, fell drastically. By 2006, a decade later, only 96 Black students enrolled in a freshman class of nearly 5,000. They became known as the Infamous 96.”

        https://www.npr.org/live-updates/supreme-court-affirmative-action-harvard-unc

        Defending that is seriously messed up. Everyone agrees that AA wasn’t perfect, but it was the most effective way of diversifying student bodies. Racist Republicans got what they wanted, it’s as simple as that.

  • BuckFigotstheThird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m sure it something sinister…like they blocked it to make way for a settlement for much, much less money, and also … immunity.