What's Happening?
Recent developments have reignited constitutional challenges to the role of relators in False Claims Act (FCA) suits. These suits, often initiated by private individuals known as relators, allow them to sue
on behalf of the government for false claims made to federal programs. Historically, the constitutionality of this mechanism has been questioned, particularly regarding the separation of powers and the Take Care Clause. The Fifth Circuit previously addressed these issues in Riley v. St. Luke’s Episcopal Hospital, but the debate has resurfaced following a dissent by Justice Clarence Thomas in 2023. Justice Thomas argued that allowing private relators to represent the government undermines executive power. This view has gained traction, with several Supreme Court justices expressing interest in revisiting the issue.
Why It's Important?
The outcome of these constitutional challenges could significantly impact the enforcement of the False Claims Act. If the Supreme Court finds the relator mechanism unconstitutional, it could limit the ability of private individuals to initiate FCA suits, potentially reducing the number of cases brought against entities accused of defrauding the government. This could affect industries heavily reliant on federal funds, such as healthcare and defense, by altering the legal landscape and enforcement mechanisms. The decision could also redefine the balance of power between the executive branch and private citizens in enforcing federal laws.
What's Next?
With more than 10 pending FCA suits featuring constitutional challenges, the issue is likely to reach the Supreme Court. The Justice Department continues to defend the constitutionality of the relator mechanism, arguing that it does not violate the Take Care Clause or the Appointments Clause. However, the growing judicial interest suggests that the Supreme Court may soon address these constitutional questions, potentially leading to a landmark decision that could reshape the enforcement of the False Claims Act.
