The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a challenge to a controversial bankruptcy settlement involving Purdue Pharma and its wealthy owners Monday.

The settlement would allocate billions of dollars to addiction treatment and opioid epidemic relief efforts and would shield the Sackler family — owners of the pharmaceutical giant that manufactures the highly addictive pain medication OxyContin — from lawsuits brought by victims of opioid abuse, and could set a dangerous precedent for corporations hoping to dodge liability in the future.

Last year, Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family agreed to pay up to $6 billion to settle claims filed by states, hospitals and individuals. The settlement included a release agreement that bars individuals from filing legal suits against the family in the future.

But the U.S. Trustee, opposed to releasing the Sackler family from legal liability, blocked the deal in May.

One year after declaring Chapter 11 bankruptcy, Purdue Pharma pleaded guilty to conspiring to defraud the U.S., and violating the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and Anti-kickback laws. The company agreed to an $8 billion payout for misleading doctors, patients and the government about OxyContin.

The drug sparked an epidemic that has caused more than 500,000 U.S. overdose deaths over two decades. Purdue introduced OxyContin in the mid-90s. The Sackler family helped develop the drug and spent millions of dollars dispatching salespeople to doctors offices with high patient volume to peddle the drug in high doses and downplay its dangers. The Sacklers raked in billions in profits as the drug ravaged the country.

The bankruptcy declaration put thousands of lawsuits filed against Purdue Pharma on hold.

Under the current settlement agreement, the family would give up ownership of Purdue Pharma and the company would be dissolved and emerge as a new company, Knoa Pharma, which would still produce OxyContin and other Purdue Pharma medications.

If approved by the Supreme Court, the deal would see billions go to states, local governments and Native American tribes to put toward services aimed at fighting the ongoing opioid epidemic. The deal also sets aside $700 million to $750 million to pay individual victims and their families — something a majority of those who’ve filed lawsuits against Purdue Pharma and the Sacklers approve of, according to court filings.

But the Justice Department’s bankruptcy watchdog called the terms an “abuse” of the bankruptcy system and unconstitutional. Deputy solicitor general Curtis Gannon, who argued on behalf of the U.S. Trustee Monday, urged the court to heed bankruptcy code and reject the Sackler family’s release.

Gregory Garre, former solicitor general under George W. Bush, represented Purdue Pharma Monday. He insisted that the deal was the only viable path to recovery for victims.

Justices Elena Kagan and Brett Kavanaugh appeared sympathetic to Garre’s position, noting support from victims for the settlement.

“It’s overwhelming, the support for this deal – and among people who have no love for the Sacklers,” Kagan said during Monday’s hearings.  “Among people who think that the Sacklers are pretty much the worst people on Earth, they’ve negotiated a deal which they think is the best that they can get.” she said.

Kavanaugh said the plan is in line with how courts have handled bankruptcy for 30 years.

“Your opening never mentioned the opioid victims,” Kavanaugh told Gannon.  “The opioid victims and their families overwhelmingly approve this plan, because they think it will ensure prompt payment.”

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson was skeptical of certain conditions of the settlement deemed “necessary” to allow for restitution, such as barring the Sacklers from being sued in future litigation related to this case. Garre claimed that “the company would liquidate and victims would receive nothing” were the releases and settlement itself not in place.

Protesters who gathered outside the Supreme Court Monday, some of whom have lost family members to the opioid crisis, condemned the Sacklers and decried the settlement. Critics have accused Purdue Pharma of using bankruptcy code as a shield for the Sackler family.