The 11th Circuit has vacated a 2024 decision from the Middle District of Florida and held that the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act do not violate the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution. In United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, the court concluded that FCA relators are not officers who must be appointed by the president. It remanded the case to the district court for further consideration of the defendants’ remaining constitutional arguments.
As we previously reported here and here, Judge Kathryn Mizelle of the Middle District of Florida found the FCA’s qui tam mechanism unconstitutional under the Appointments Clause. That decision followed concerns raised by several Supreme Court justices about the constitutionality of the provisions. The district court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the FCA complaint. It reasoned that an FCA relator acts as an officer of the United States because the relator exercises significant authority reserved to the executive branch. That authority includes bringing an enforcement action on behalf of the United States and seeking recovery for the U.S. Treasury. A relator also chooses which claims to pursue, which theories to raise, which defendants to sue, and which arguments to make on appeal. Those choices can create precedent that binds the United States. Yet a relator is not appointed by the president, a department head, or a court of law under Article II. On that basis, the...
To display this content from YouTube, you must enable advertisement tracking and audience measurement. 2 min After a monthlong lull in hostilities, the United States launched fresh airstrikes on I...