Listen to the article
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has declined to hear an interlocutory appeal challenging the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA), marking a significant development in ongoing litigation that could potentially reshape federal whistleblower provisions.
In a decision announced Monday, the three-judge panel determined that the case did not meet the exceptional circumstances required for an immediate appeal before final judgment, despite the defendants’ arguments that the constitutional questions at stake warranted earlier intervention.
The ruling stems from a qui tam action brought by whistleblowers against a group of healthcare providers alleged to have submitted fraudulent Medicare and Medicaid claims. The defendants had moved to dismiss the case on grounds that the FCA’s qui tam provisions violate Article II of the Constitution, specifically the Appointments Clause and the President’s duty to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”
The district court had previously denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss, prompting the request for an interlocutory appeal – a relatively rare procedural step allowing appellate review before a final judgment is rendered.
“While we recognize the defendants’ constitutional arguments raise serious questions about the structure of FCA enforcement, these questions do not justify departing from our standard procedure of reviewing cases after final judgment,” wrote Circuit Judge Maria Thompson in the opinion.
The False Claims Act, originally enacted during the Civil War to combat fraud against the Union Army, has evolved into the government’s primary civil enforcement tool against fraud involving federal funds. Its qui tam provisions allow private citizens, known as “relators,” to file lawsuits on behalf of the government and receive a percentage of any recovery – typically between 15 and 30 percent of the total settlement or judgment.
The constitutional challenge centers on whether these provisions improperly delegate executive power to private individuals who lack political accountability. Critics argue this structure violates the separation of powers doctrine by allowing private citizens to exercise prosecutorial discretion that should belong exclusively to the Executive Branch.
Healthcare industry experts note that this decision comes amid increasing scrutiny of the FCA’s scope and application. In fiscal year 2023, the Department of Justice recovered over $2.6 billion from FCA cases, with approximately $1.8 billion coming from cases involving healthcare fraud.
“The Sixth Circuit’s reluctance to fast-track this constitutional question reflects the judiciary’s general hesitance to upend a fraud-fighting mechanism that has recovered more than $70 billion for taxpayers since 1986,” said Eleanor Westbrook, a healthcare compliance attorney not involved in the litigation.
However, the court’s decision not to hear the appeal now does not foreclose future consideration of these constitutional issues once the case reaches final judgment. Several legal scholars anticipate the question may eventually reach the Supreme Court, particularly given the current Court’s interest in examining delegations of executive authority.
The defendants’ legal team expressed disappointment but indicated they would continue pursuing their constitutional arguments through trial.
“We respect the court’s procedural decision, but remain confident that the qui tam provisions cannot withstand proper constitutional scrutiny,” said lead defense counsel James Rutherford. “These provisions effectively create private attorneys general without any meaningful supervision by the Executive Branch.”
The Justice Department, which often intervenes in FCA cases it deems meritorious, had opposed the interlocutory appeal, arguing that disrupting the long-established qui tam framework would severely hamper government fraud enforcement efforts.
This ruling follows similar challenges in other circuits, creating a patchwork of decisions that may eventually necessitate Supreme Court resolution. The Fifth Circuit recently allowed a similar constitutional challenge to proceed, while the Ninth Circuit rejected comparable arguments last year.
For healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies, and government contractors – industries most frequently targeted by FCA litigation – the continuing constitutional uncertainty creates compliance challenges as they navigate federal contracting and billing practices.
The case will now return to the district court for continued proceedings on the merits of the underlying fraud allegations, with the constitutional questions preserved for potential review after final judgment.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
8 Comments
The False Claims Act’s qui tam provisions empower whistleblowers to help the government uncover fraud. While the defendants’ constitutional arguments merit consideration, the Sixth Circuit’s decision suggests the courts remain cautious about disrupting this longstanding law. Curious to see how this case unfolds.
I agree, the FCA’s whistleblower incentives are an important part of its effectiveness. The Sixth Circuit seems inclined to let the process play out rather than make a premature ruling on the constitutional questions.
The False Claims Act has been an important tool for fighting fraud and protecting taxpayer funds. While the defendants raise valid constitutional concerns, the Sixth Circuit’s decision suggests the courts want to proceed cautiously before potentially disrupting this well-established law. Curious to see how this case develops.
Interesting development in the ongoing legal battle over the False Claims Act. While the defendants raise valid constitutional concerns, the Sixth Circuit’s decision suggests the courts remain cautious about disrupting this well-established fraud-fighting law. I’ll be curious to see how this case progresses.
You raise a good point. The FCA has been an effective tool for decades, so courts may be reluctant to upend it without a clear constitutional violation. The defendants will likely continue pressing their case, but the Sixth Circuit seems inclined to let the process play out.
The False Claims Act plays a crucial role in exposing fraud and protecting taxpayer funds. While the constitutional questions raised are noteworthy, I’m glad the Sixth Circuit upheld the Act’s provisions at this stage. Whistleblowers play a vital part in safeguarding public programs.
I agree. The FCA’s qui tam mechanism empowers citizens to assist the government in rooting out fraud. Preserving this tool is important to maintain accountability, even if it raises complex legal issues.
The False Claims Act is a crucial tool for exposing fraud and waste in government programs. While the defendants raise interesting constitutional questions, I’m glad the Sixth Circuit declined to grant an interlocutory appeal at this stage. Allowing the case to proceed will ensure a thorough review of the issues.