Overview
- The panel heard from the defendants, the relator, the United States, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in a closely watched challenge to the False Claims Act’s qui tam framework.
- Judges pressed whether private relators qualify as Article II "officers" and questioned if any precedent applies the Appointments Clause to someone not employed by or under contract with the government.
- The Justice Department argued it retains authority to intervene or dismiss at any time and that relators lack continuing governmental power, while the defense warned of unconstitutional outsourcing of executive enforcement.
- The court explored potential outcomes, including remanding before reaching the merits, as multiple judges acknowledged recent signals from Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh inviting Supreme Court review.
- Context for the appeal includes a 2024 district court ruling deeming relators unconstitutional, countered by numerous decisions upholding qui tam, with DOJ pointing to multibillion-dollar recoveries to underscore the stakes.