11th Cir. Upholds FCA Qui Tam Provision on Narrow Grounds
The Eleventh Circuit reversed a district court's finding that the False Claims Act's qui tam provisions are unconstitutional, but its narrow ruling leaves key separation-of-powers questions unresolved for future cases.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed a district court ruling that the False Claims Act's (FCA) qui tam provisions are unconstitutional, but did so on narrow grounds that leave larger questions unresolved. The lower court in U.S. ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates had found that private relators are "officers" of the United States who are not properly appointed under Article II's Appointments Clause. The Eleventh Circuit disagreed, holding that a relator's role is temporary for a single case and not a "continuing position." This decision is significant as the first appellate ruling on the topic since several Supreme Court justices expressed interest in reviewing the constitutionality of the FCA's citizen-suit framework. By declining to address separate, potent challenges under the Take Care and Vesting Clauses, the court leaves the door open for future attacks on the qui tam regime. The case was remanded for consideration of these other constitutional issues, and similar challenges are pending in other circuits, suggesting the matter is likely headed for Supreme Court review.