ATTORNEY GENERAL TONG STATEMENT ON LAWLESS TRUMP ELECTION ORDER
(Hartford, CT) – Attorney General William Tong released the following statement in response to the executive order issued last night by President Donald Trump seeking to illegally defund states who do not comply with his list of voter suppression measures.
“This is a lawless attempt to suppress and manipulate free and fair elections across the United States, from an unhinged aspiring dictator still seeking to rewrite history to erase his defeat more than four years ago. Since 1788—plainly spelled out in Article 1 of the Constitution and repeatedly affirmed by the Supreme Court—elections are run by the states. This is about Donald Trump trying to pick and choose who gets to vote in this country, and that is not what democracy means. We are working closely with states across the country and are evaluating all legal options to protect our constitutional authority to conduct our elections in a manner that respects voters’ rights and our need for safe and secure elections,” said Attorney General Tong.
ATTORNEY GENERAL TONG URGES CONSUMERS TO CHECK ELIGIBILITY FOR COMPENSATION FOR INFLATED GENERIC DRUG PRICES
Attorney General Tong Leads 50 States and Territories Filing Motion for Preliminary Approval for $39.1 Million Settlement with Generic Drug Manufacturer Apotex over Conspiracy to Inflate Prices and Limit Competition
(Hartford, CT) – Attorney General William Tong is urging consumers to check their eligibility for compensation for certain generic drug purchases as Connecticut leads 50 states and territories in seeking preliminary approval for a $39.1 million settlement with generic drug manufacturer Apotex over conspiracy to inflate prices and limit competition.
Attorney General Tong and the multistate coalition previously announced the settlement in principle with Apotex last fall along with a $10 million settlement with Heritage Pharmaceuticals. At the time of that announcement, the settlement with Apotex was conditioned on the signatures of all necessary states and territories. Those signatures have been obtained, and the coalition is filing the settlement today in U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut in Hartford.
If you purchased a generic prescription drug listed here between May 2009 and December 2019, you may be eligible for compensation. To determine your eligibility, call 1-866-290-0182 (Toll-Free), email info@AGGenericDrugs.com or visit www.AGGenericDrugs.com.
“Apotex engaged in a widespread conspiracy to jack up prices and block competition for generic prescription drugs. Their brazen collusion cost American families and our public healthcare programs millions of dollars. If you are among the millions and millions of Americans who purchased one of many prescription drugs covered by our suit, you may be eligible for compensation. I urge you to visit www.AGGenericDrugs.com so you can check the drug list and register your contact information for updates on the claims process” said Attorney General Tong.
The settlement agreements resolve allegations that both Apotex and Heritage engaged in widespread, long-running conspiracies to artificially inflate and manipulate prices, reduce competition, and unreasonably restrain trade with regard to numerous generic prescription drugs. As part of the settlement agreements, both Apotex and Heritage have agreed to cooperate in the ongoing multistate litigations against 30 corporate defendants and 25 individual executives. Both companies have further agreed to injunctive relief to prevent future misconduct and to a series of internal reforms to ensure fair competition and compliance with antitrust laws.
Connecticut is leading a coalition of nearly all states and territories filing three antitrust complaints, starting first in 2016. The first Complaint included Heritage and 17 other corporate Defendants, two individual Defendants, and 15 generic drugs. Two former executives from Heritage Pharmaceuticals, Jeffery Glazer and Jason Malek, have since entered into settlement agreements and are cooperating. The second Complaint was filed in 2019 against Teva Pharmaceuticals and 19 of the nation’s largest generic drug manufacturers. The Complaint names 16 individual senior executive Defendants. The third complaint, to be tried first, focuses on 80 topical generic drugs that account for billions of dollars of sales in the United States and names 26 corporate defendants and 10 individual defendants. Six additional pharmaceutical executives have entered into settlement agreements with the States and have been cooperating to support the States’ claims in all three cases.
The cases all stem from a series of investigations built on evidence from several cooperating witnesses at the core of the different conspiracies, a massive document database of over 20 million documents, and a phone records database containing millions of call detail records and contact information for over 600 sales and pricing individuals in the generics industry. Each complaint addresses a different set of drugs and defendants, and lays out an interconnected web of industry executives where these competitors met with each other during industry dinners, “girls nights out”, lunches, cocktail parties, golf outings and communicated via frequent telephone calls, emails and text messages that sowed the seeds for their illegal agreements. Throughout the complaints, defendants use terms like “fair share,” “playing nice in the sandbox,” and “responsible competitor” to describe how they unlawfully discouraged competition, raised prices and enforced an ingrained culture of collusion. Among the records obtained by the States is a two-volume notebook containing the contemporaneous notes of one of the States’ cooperators that memorialized his discussions during phone calls with competitors and internal company meetings over a period of several years.
Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Northern Mariana Islands, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, U.S. Virgin Islands, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming, and Puerto Rico joined in today’s announcement.
Lead Assistant Attorney General Joseph Nielsen and Assistant Attorneys General Alex Frisbee, Kyle Ainsworth, Cara Moody, Paralegal Gaile Colaresi and Deputy Associate Attorney General Nicole Demers, Chief of the Antitrust Section – along with former team members Assistant Attorneys General Laura Martella, Christine Miller and Sage LaRue Zitzkat, and retired Assistant Attorneys General Michael Cole, Rachel Davis, and Toni Conti – assisted the Attorney General in this matter.
ATTORNEY GENERAL TONG STATEMENT ON U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISION UPHOLDING FEDERAL GHOST GUN REGULATIONS
(Hartford, CT) — Attorney General William Tong released the following statement regarding the 7-2 decision issued today by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bondi v. Vanderstock upholding federal ghost gun regulations.
“This is a significant win for public safety, for commonsense gun safety laws, and for everyone who cares about keeping crime guns off our streets and out of the hands of dangerous criminals. Ghost guns are guns. They exist for one reason—to evade background checks and law enforcement. The ATF rule is fully lawful and necessary to protect public safety. I will continue to defend our lifesaving gun laws—in any state, in any court, anywhere public safety is under threat. That includes enforcement of Connecticut’s own ghost gun laws, and ongoing efforts to defend our post-Sandy Hook assault weapon and large-capacity magazine bans, commonsense age limits on pistol permits and prohibitions on firearms in state parks,” said Attorney General Tong. “We will not allow crime guns and weapons of war back into our schools, our parks, our houses of worship, our grocery stores, and our communities.”
This was not a Second Amendment case but rather a question of statutory definitions. The case challenged a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) rule, which clarifies that the definition of “firearms” in the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) includes kits and parts that can be converted into fully-functional firearms. This common-sense clarification does not ban gun kits. Rather, it subjects kits and nearly-complete guns to the same rules as conventionally manufactured guns—including serial number and background check requirements.
Attorney General Tong joined a coalition of 24 attorneys general filing an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold the ATF’s ghost gun rule, arguing that striking it down would harm public safety and hinder law enforcement. The attorneys general described how the rule is consistent with the text, history, and purpose of the GCA and demonstrate that the Fifth Circuit’s decision was erroneous. They argued that the rule is necessary to close a dangerous loophole and stop people who are banned from owning guns from making an end run around existing law—which they were able to do before gun kits were subject to the same regulations as other firearms. Additionally, the coalition shared early evidence that the rule was already improving public safety: multiple jurisdictions had seen a drop in ghost gun recoveries since the rule went into effect in 2023. A copy of the brief is available here.
Connecticut has taken its own commonsense measures to protect the public from the dangers of ghost guns. On October 1, 2019, Connecticut banned the sale and receipt of unfinished frame and lower receiver gun components lacking serial numbers or unique identification, which are used to build ghost guns. In 2023, Attorney General Tong sued four out-of-state firearm dealers for selling and advertising illegal, untraceable ghost gun parts in violation of Connecticut’s 2019 ban. Connecticut has since reached civil settlements with three of the four dealers recovering penalties totaling $885,000. Two of the dealers have ceased operations and a third has committed to putting in place strong controls and reporting to ensure ongoing compliance with Connecticut law.