Federal Regulators Seek Contempt Ruling Against Martin Shkreli Over Industry Ban
Published 5h ago · Latest report 3h ago
Covered in 2 countries
US regulators are seeking a contempt ruling against Martin Shkreli for allegedly breaching his lifetime pharmaceutical ban.
The Federal Trade Commission and seven US states have asked a federal judge to hold Martin Shkreli in contempt. Regulators claim the pharmaceutical executive repeatedly violated a lifetime industry ban by trading shares in dozens of drug companies and commenting on their operations. Shkreli has been subject to the restriction since his release from federal prison in 2022.
- The accusationRegulators state that Shkreli traded stocks in at least 60 pharmaceutical companies and publicly discussed their businesses.
- The backgroundA 2022 court order permanently barred Shkreli from participating in the pharmaceutical sector following an antitrust enforcement action.
By the numbers
Why it matters
Martin Shkreli drew widespread notoriety for dramatically hiking the price of a life-saving medication while serving as a pharmaceutical executive. Legal restrictions imposed on him aim to prevent further anticompetitive conduct and corporate misconduct within the industry.
What outlets agree on
The Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general filed a motion in a New York federal court asking a judge to hold Martin Shkreli in contempt for violating his industry ban.
In this story
Covered by 3 outlets
67% of the sources are Center
Lean ratings via AllSides, Ad Fontes Media, Media Bias/Fact Check
- The GuardianFTC and seven states seek contempt ruling against Shkreli over pharma ban3h ago · open ↗
- Financial TimesFTC says ‘pharma bro’ Martin Shkreli repeatedly violated industry ban4h ago · open ↗
- UPIFTC asks judge to find 'Pharma Bro' Martin Shkreli in contempt5h ago · open ↗
Similar stories
What people are saying
Opens a search on that site in a new tab. Posts there are not ours and are not checked.
The headline, summary and key points are AI-generated from the sources above.






Comments