State joins fight against public trust settlement

Effort latest in battle to hold Purdue Pharma accountable

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong joined two dozen attorneys general from across the country last week in opposition to a proposed U.S. Department of Justice settlement agreement with Stamford-based Purdue Pharma that would preserve its lucrative Oxycontin business as a public trust.

The letter to U.S. Attorney General William Barr, signed by the 25 attorneys general, represents the latest in a yearslong battle to hold the Stamford-based drugmaker accountable for its role in the deadly opioid epidemic.

It was sent after reports that the DOJ is close to reaching a settlement with Purdue Pharma that, among other provisions, would transform the company into a public trust that would continue to sell drugs, with proceeds benefiting the states and cities suing the drugmaker.

“A business that killed thousands of Americans should not be associated with government,” the letter reads. “Instead, the business should be sold to private owners, so the government can enforce the law against it with the same impartiality as for any other company.”

Purdue Pharma, in the face of hundreds of lawsuits, filed for bankruptcy last year, the company claims, as part of a settlement agreement with some of the attorneys general that have filed suits against Purdue’s alleged role in fueling the opioid epidemic.

Core to the lawsuits are claims that Purdue downplayed the dangers of Oxycontin, which proved to be yet another highly addictive prescription opioid. Lawmakers for years have said overprescribing of drugs like Oxycontin is what spurred the deadly opioid epidemic that has killed thousands of people in Connecticut.

“Purdue’s reckless pursuit of profits ignited a nationwide public health crisis that destroyed the lives of thousands of Connecticut families. Now Purdue is claiming it should remain in control of any company that carries on the sale of its products. That is untenable,” Tong said, in a written statement. “Any continued corporate existence of Purdue past bankruptcy is dangerous to public health and welfare — especially one that sells opioids under the special protections afforded to a public benefit corporation. I expect current management to try to remain in control of the corporation. This would be even more outrageous.”

Purdue, ahead of announcing its plans to file bankruptcy, had announced an agreement in principle with 24 attorneys general and other plaintiffs that would create a settlement structure that would put $10 billion toward the opioid crisis. Included in the agreement was that the Sackler family that founded the company would contribute at least $3 billion.

Tong was a vocal opponent to Purdue filing for bankruptcy, and stood with others in opposition to the proposed agreement. Tong told The Courant at the time: “The idea that there’s $10 to $12 billion on the table isn’t true.” He described the company’s move toward bankruptcy was an effort “to extinguish the claims of states, cities and families of overdose victims.”

Tong’s office said recently that their lawsuit against the drugmaker remains on hold during the bankruptcy proceedings, but they are continuing to fight to ensure that the Sacklers and Purdue are held accountable.