Jump to content

Recommended Posts

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • bob7947 changed the title to Qui Tam

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...