In all honesty while they rank the US as low on a corruption-scale globally they do capture a fair amount of the corruption in the US. The US has similar score

In all honesty while they rank the US as low on a corruption-scale globally they do capture a fair amount of the corruption in the US. The US has similar scores to Bhutan and Seychelles not Denmark and Canada. As for the case itself, it seems the court wants to protect the settlement because they know it's unlikely they will be able to pierce the veil of corporate protection and go after the owner's for the $5.5-$6 billion that is only voluntarily contributed if the settlement works. In considering the greater good I think the win of $5.5-$6 billion in additional settlement money for victims is a greater good than the restrictions on potential lawsuits against the Sacklers is an evil. Ideally any victims who had their rights restricted by this clause would have an option to be a late joiner of the settlement and could ensure compensation that way.