Abstract
Anglo-American legislation since the fourteenth century has often authorized “popular” or “qui tam” enforcement, in which an uninjured “common informer” litigates to collect a forfeiture for violation of a statute. Popular enforcement has become considerably less common than in earlier centuries, but remains important because of the qui tam provisions of the federal False Claims Act (FCA). In Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States ex rel. Stevens, the Supreme Court rejected an Article III standing challenge to qui tam litigation, concluding that the long history of popular enforcement means qui tam suits present cognizable “cases and controversies of the sort traditionally amenable to, and resolved by, the judicial process.” However, the Vermont Agency Court specifically reserved the question whether federal qui tam legislation might intrude on the President’s Article II powers by authorizing individuals to litigate claims that should be pursued by the executive branch or to do so without proper appointment. Several Justices have expressed interest in addressing the Article II question in an appropriate case.
Repository Citation
Randy Beck,
Qui Tam Legislation and Article II: State Constitutional Precursors to the “Take Care” Clause
, 49 Harv. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 33
(2026),
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/fac_artchop/1788