Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Sackler family granted immunity from civil lawsuits.

Of course these GARBAGE people, these sociopaths, have won and they got away with a huge crime! The rich are laughing at us. They system is rigged in favour of the rich. News to no one, but appalling and enraging.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 15June 28, 2024 1:26 PM

I've read Empire of Pain (very good, about the Sackler family). And what I got out of it was that they were pretty much mostly people who just wanted to be rich and stay rich. I think that a lot of people would do the same. My big issue is with the horrible regulation. They were ALLOWED to get away with it - repeatedly. Governments need to stop assuming that people can be true to principles when offered the chance of huge wealth as well as stop being so corrupt - people who let the Sacklers get away with it took money and jobs from them. You just simply can't depend on the 'goodness' of humans volunteering to be good. You have to have proper and well policed safety checks against it.

by Anonymousreply 1May 31, 2023 1:39 PM

This is America. Of course they are immune.

by Anonymousreply 2May 31, 2023 1:43 PM

This is terrible news.

The entire Sackler family and their descendants should be run out of America with flaming pitchforks and never allowed to return. The damage they've knowingly done is incalculable and ongoing.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 3May 31, 2023 1:45 PM

For people interested I highly recommend the series "Dopesick" on Netflix. Michael Keaton as a small town Virginia doctor in a community overtaken by Oxycontin abuse is brilliant. Also stars DL Fave Mare Winningham.

by Anonymousreply 4May 31, 2023 2:17 PM

Cunts should be left penniless

by Anonymousreply 5May 31, 2023 2:34 PM

Monsters.

by Anonymousreply 6May 31, 2023 4:20 PM

No, OP, they were not granted immunity.

by Anonymousreply 7June 28, 2024 3:58 AM

If only someone accidentally placed powerful opioids in one of the family’s future prescriptions.

by Anonymousreply 8June 28, 2024 4:04 AM

Gorsuch, Thomas, Alito, Barrett, and Jackson struck down the proposed settlement under which the Sacklers would get lifetime immunity. Kavanaugh, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Roberts disagreed.

Unusual bedfellows because the case is so complex, it would have been a shitty decision regardless. 100k people who could have benefited from that settlement got screwed, but I still think that's preferable to those demons getting lifetime immunity.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 9June 28, 2024 4:07 AM

The money the victims' families would have gotten was anywhere between $3,800 and $43,000 over 10 years, while this cunt criminal family would have gotten off scot-free. And the Sacklers would have gotten full immunity.

Now they'll be sued out of their fucking minds by hundreds of thousands.

Good.

by Anonymousreply 10June 28, 2024 4:13 AM

What R7 said. The deal which granted immunity was overturned.

by Anonymousreply 11June 28, 2024 4:21 AM

Check the date on the thread. This is old news.

by Anonymousreply 12June 28, 2024 4:22 AM

I know this is an old thread, R12. But "new" news has replaced OP's original post, so it's worth rehashing.

by Anonymousreply 13June 28, 2024 12:58 PM

June 27, 2024

[quote]The Supreme Court said on Thursday that members of the Sackler family cannot be shielded from liability for civil claims related to the opioid epidemic, jeopardizing a bankruptcy plan that would have offered such protection in exchange for channeling billions of dollars toward addressing the crisis.

[quote]In a 5-to-4 decision, the justices found that the deal, carefully negotiated over years with states, tribes, local governments and individuals, had broken a basic tenet of bankruptcy law by shielding members of the Sackler family from lawsuits without the consent of those who might sue.

by Anonymousreply 14June 28, 2024 1:25 PM

I didn't read the decision that way. The court ruled that Sackler could not be protected from future lawsuits . Sackler had agreed to the settlement becuase it wasstipulated that they would be pretectedfrom future, individual suits. Court said no, you won't.

by Anonymousreply 15June 28, 2024 1:26 PM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!