Eleventh Circuit upholds constitutionality of FCA qui tam provisions

The Eleventh Circuit, in Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, upheld the constitutionality of the False Claims Act's qui tam provisions, rejecting the separation-of-powers challenge to the relator mechanism. Littler, writing in Corporate Counsel, advises employers not to close their compliance manuals on the assumption that qui tam exposure had been narrowed.

Counsel should care for two reasons. First, qui tam remains one of the most consequential private-enforcement channels against employers and contractors that bill federal programs: a relator's suit carries statutory damages exposure, and whether the government intervenes changes the relator's share. Second, the appellate endorsement suggests the constitutional theory tested in Zafirov is not prevailing in at least one circuit, so the issue stays live elsewhere and could generate conflicting appellate authority or Supreme Court review. For clients with federal-payor revenue or federal contracts, the operative risk is unchanged: FCA liability turns on knowingly false claims and on misrepresentations about compliance systems.

Practical next steps: keep FCA-specific controls and hotline intake current, document the timing and basis of responses to internal allegations, and monitor government interventions in pending qui tam matters and further circuit rulings on the constitutional question.