Money doesn't usually buy this much vitriol. In the United States, we tend to celebrate the ultra-wealthy, turning tech moguls into icons and real estate tycoons into presidents. But the Sackler family is different. They didn't just build a business; they built a crisis that redefined American grief. If you walk into the Metropolitan Museum of Art or the Louvre, you might see their name being scrubbed off the walls, literally chiseled away like a bad memory.
It’s personal.
When people call the Sacklers the most hated family in America, they aren't talking about a reality TV feud or some billionaire's eccentric tweets. They’re talking about OxyContin. They’re talking about a marketing machine that convinced doctors a highly addictive opioid was "less than 1%" addictive. That single lie, peddled by Purdue Pharma, kicked off a domino effect that has claimed over half a million lives.
The marketing of a catastrophe
Arthur Sackler was a bit of a genius, honestly. A terrible, dark kind of genius. Before he died in 1987—long before OxyContin hit the shelves—he revolutionized how drugs were sold. He realized that you don't sell to the patient; you sell to the doctor. You buy the ads in medical journals. You fund the "educational" seminars. You create a culture where the pill is the answer to everything.
When Richard Sackler and the rest of the clan launched OxyContin in 1996, they used Arthur’s playbook on steroids. They didn't just launch a painkiller. They launched a crusade.
They pushed the idea of "pseudo-addiction." This is a term that still makes medical experts see red. The idea was that if a patient showed signs of addiction—craving the drug, seeking more—it wasn't actually addiction. No, the Sacklers claimed it was just a sign that their pain wasn't being treated enough. The solution? Give them more. It’s a circular logic that sounds like something out of a horror movie, yet it was the official corporate line for years.
🔗 Read more: We Are Legal Revolution: Why the Status Quo is Finally Breaking
Tactics that broke the system
The sales reps were aggressive. They were young, hungry, and armed with maps showing exactly which doctors were already high-volume prescribers. They targeted rural areas—places like West Virginia and Maine—where physical labor was the backbone of the economy. Loggers, miners, and factory workers had back pain. They needed to work.
Purdue gave these doctors "swag." We're talking fishing hats, plush toys, and "Get Help with OxyContin" starter coupons. It sounds ridiculous now. Giving out coupons for an opioid? But it happened. They incentivized the very thing that was hollowing out these communities.
Why the anger is so specific
You might wonder why other pharmaceutical families don't get the same heat. The Johnson & Johnson heirs or the people behind Fentanyl don't have protesters screaming outside their homes quite as often. The reason the Sacklers are the most hated family in America is the perceived lack of remorse and the aggressive pursuit of "reputational laundering."
For decades, the family used their massive wealth to buy prestige. They wanted to be the modern Medicis. There’s a Sackler Wing at the Met, a Sackler Gallery at the Smithsonian, and labs at Harvard and Oxford. This wasn't just charity; it was a shield. They used philanthropy to distract from the source of the money.
The legal gymnastics
Then there’s the bankruptcy. This is where the story gets really technical and really frustrating. Purdue Pharma filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, which is standard for a company facing thousands of lawsuits. However, the Sacklers themselves didn't file for bankruptcy. They used a controversial legal maneuver called "third-party releases."
💡 You might also like: Oil Market News Today: Why Prices Are Crashing Despite Middle East Chaos
Basically, they offered to pay around $6 billion into a settlement fund—a massive sum, sure—but in exchange, they wanted total legal immunity from all future civil opioid-related lawsuits.
Imagine that. You walk away with billions still in the bank, and you can never be sued again for the deaths your company’s product caused. In 2024, the Supreme Court finally stepped in and blocked this "sweetheart deal." Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the bankruptcy code doesn't allow for this kind of shield for people who haven't actually declared bankruptcy themselves. It was a massive moment, but it also left the victims in limbo, waiting for a payout that keeps getting delayed by legal red tape.
The human cost of the "Sackler Way"
It’s easy to get lost in the numbers. $6 billion. 500,000 deaths. 80 milligrams. But the hatred stems from the individual stories.
Take a look at the work of Nan Goldin. She’s a world-renowned photographer who became addicted to OxyContin after a surgery. She didn't just get clean; she started P.A.I.N. (Prescription Addiction Intervention Now). Her group is the reason the museums started taking the name down. They staged "die-ins" at the Guggenheim, throwing fake pill bottles into the fountain.
Goldin’s activism shifted the narrative. It stopped being about "junkies" in an alleyway and started being about a predatory business model. People realized that the "most hated family in America" title wasn't an exaggeration—it was a reflection of the fact that almost everyone in this country knows someone who has been affected by the opioid crisis.
📖 Related: Cuanto son 100 dolares en quetzales: Why the Bank Rate Isn't What You Actually Get
Not all Sacklers are the same
Nuance is important, even here. The family is huge. There are three main branches descending from the brothers Arthur, Mortimer, and Raymond.
- Arthur’s side: They actually sold their interest in Purdue before OxyContin was even a thing. They’ve spent years trying to distance themselves from the Raymond and Mortimer branches, who actually ran the company during the Oxy years.
- The Raymond and Mortimer branches: These are the ones people are usually talking about. They sat on the board. They approved the budgets. They pushed the sales targets.
Even within the family, there’s been internal strife. Some members have reportedly been horrified by the company’s actions, while others, like Richard Sackler, have remained defiant. In emails revealed during discovery, Richard once suggested that the "scum" (the people addicted to the drug) were the problem, not the drug itself. That’s the kind of quote that stays with people.
Where do we go from here?
The legal battle is still grinding along. Because the Supreme Court blocked the settlement, the parties have to go back to the drawing board. The Sacklers are still among the richest people on the planet. They have homes in Palm Beach and the Hamptons. They aren't in jail. In the US, it is notoriously hard to prosecute corporate executives for the actions of their companies, especially when it comes to "marketing" decisions.
If you want to understand the full scope of this, you have to look at the documents. The "Sackler Documents" archive at Johns Hopkins University contains millions of internal memos, emails, and reports. It’s a chilling look at how profit can be prioritized over human life with such clinical efficiency.
Actionable steps for the concerned observer
- Support Local Recovery: The money from these settlements is supposed to go to "abatement"—meaning treatment and prevention. Keep an eye on your state’s attorney general to see how that money is actually being spent. It shouldn't just go into a general fund.
- Educate on "Drug Laundering": Be skeptical of corporate philanthropy. When a massive name is attached to a wing of a hospital or a museum, look at where that money originated.
- Advocate for Transparency: Support legislation that limits the use of "non-debtor releases" in bankruptcy court. This is the loophole the Sacklers almost used to escape all future liability.
- Read the Primary Sources: Don't just take a journalist's word for it. Look at the Purdue Pharma settlement documents and the internal emails made public by the Massachusetts Attorney General's office.
The story of the Sacklers isn't just about one family. It’s a cautionary tale about what happens when regulation fails, when corporate greed is left unchecked, and when the legal system is used as a playground for the wealthy. They might keep their billions, but the name "Sackler" will likely never recover its luster. It has become a shorthand for a very specific kind of American tragedy.