(3rd Circ., filed July 21, 2025): Arguing that the qui tam provisions violate Article II’s vesting clause, the Appointments Clause, and the Take Care Clause. History cannot salvage the qui tam provisions’ affront to the Article II. Also arguing that the constitutionally excessive fine imposed here highlights the Article II problems with qui tam litigation. Profit-driven relators naturally pursue as excessive a fine as the court will permit.
