FTC Sues Martin Shkreli for Violating Court Orders, Accusing Him of Stock Manipulation The Federal Trade Commission has filed a contempt of court complaint against former pharma executive Martin Shkreli, alleging that he has traded in pharmaceutical stocks and broadcast investment advice despite a lifetime ban following his 2017 conviction. The United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has filed a contempt of court complaint against Martin Shkreli, the former pharmaceutical executive who gained notoriety in the 2010s for dramatically raising the price of the life‑saving drug Daraprim from $13.50 to $750 per pill. Shkreli, who is widely known on the internet as the so‑called "Pharma Bro," is accused by the FTC of violating a lifetime ban imposed after his 2017 conviction on eight counts, including securities fraud. Those counts stemmed from a pattern of stock manipulation and anticompetitive conduct that prosecutors argued the judge and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure found to have raised prescription drug costs for American patients and stifled competition.Shkreli Allegedly Violates Lifetime Trading BanAfter the 2017 verdict in Brooklyn, New York, Shkreli was subject to a strict injunction barring him from trading any pharmaceutical company stock or publicizing his views on the industry. This injunction is part of a broader legal mandate that prohibits him from engaging, "in any manner, in any activity that constitutes the practice of trading, selling, or owning any share, advisory, or other investment interest in a pharmaceutical company or any other company involved in the production and distribution of drugs." Seven states joined the FTC in requesting the court hold Shkreli in contempt for allegedly flouting this injunction. According to the FTC's press release, Shkreli has publicly traded in the stocks of at least 60 pharmaceutical companies since his release from prison in 2021. The agency points to a series of livestreams and social media posts in which he gives out investment advice, specifically encouraging viewers to buy or short pharmaceutical stocks based on his own research.In one episode, he urged his audience to "short [certain] drug companies" because he believed their upcoming clinical trials would fail, thereby implying a direct influence on short‑selling activities. The FTC also alleges that Shkreli has used these online broadcasts to conduct "public campaigns" aimed at driving down the prices of specific drug stocks, for example by falsely arguing that a generic competitor would reach the market earlier than the company's own drugs.FTC Seeks Forfeiture of Profits and FinesSuch communications, the agency maintains, are directly in conflict with the injunction that bars him from making any public statements about the pharmaceutical industry. The penultimate paragraph of the FTC's complaint requests that a federal judge award Shkreli a fine equal to the profits he amassed from the alleged stock trading, including prejudgment interest, while denying the possibility of offsetting those losses with any other deductions.The agency also demands that the court impose escalating penalties for future infractions that might include additional financial penalties or a potential incarceration of the former executive. In a statement released by the FTC's Bureau of Competition, Director Daniel Guarnera said: "After a full trial, the court found that Martin Shkreli's conduct drove up prescription drug costs for American patients and blocked the entry of lower-cost generics.When a judgment is entered by a court-whether it be a settlement or an order following a trial-the defendant must fulfill his obligations. Today's action should serve as notice that the FTC will not hesitate to enforce violations of court orders.Case Highlights Pharma Regulatory Tensions" The astonishment at Shkreli's continued influence over financial markets is compounded by his prior legal history: after being released on bail following his 2017 conviction, he was re‑arrested following a Facebook post in which he allegedly threatened a political figure, after which the Secret Service intervened. Shkreli's case has become emblematic of the regulatory tensions surrounding the pharmaceutical industry, the extent to which former executives can influence markets, and the FTC's willingness to enforce restrictions imposed by federal courts.The FTC's contempt filing underscores the commission's position that any violation of a court‑ordered injunction-especially when it concerns public discussions that might manipulate stock prices-is a serious breach with tangible economic consequences for consumers and investors alike. The outcome of this contempt proceeding will set an important precedent for other cases in which defendants might attempt to circumvent or undermine court orders in the wake of criminal convictions.