Jump to content

Featured Replies

Posted
comment_86702

I found this blurb a few moments ago.

Quote

U.S. District Judge Kathryn Mizelle on Monday deemed unlawful so-called qui tam enforcement of the False Claims Act, an 1863 law passed in response to defense contractor fraud during the Civil War. The qui tam provision lets private parties bring suits on behalf of the government. 

Case No: 8:19-cv-01236-KKM-SPF

  • Moderator changed the title to Qui Tam
comment_86706

Hmm. Fascinating.

Quote

Zafirov’s argument turns on whether the foregoing history requires a departure from the Supreme Court’s well-settled Article II jurisprudence. It does not. When the Constitution is clear, no amount of countervailing history overcomes what the States ratified. See Rahimi, 144 S. Ct. at 1912 n.2 (Kavanaugh, J., concurring); id. at 1908 (Gorsuch, J., concurring); Polansky, 599 U.S. at 450 (Thomas, J., dissenting); N.L.R.B. v. Noel Canning, 573 U.S. 513, 573, 613–14 (2014) (Scalia, J., concurring in the judgment, joined by Roberts, C.J., Thomas, and Alito, JJ.).  

Gonna put a stop to a lot of FCA cases if this decision is upheld.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.