Jacob T. Elberg is an associate professor of law and faculty director of the Center for Health & Pharmaceutical Law at Seton Hall University Law School, where he teaches courses in health law, health care fraud and corruption, data analytics, and evidence. He graduated from Harvard Law School in 2003 and served for 11 years with the Department of Justice.
The Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the Department of Justice has broad, but not unfettered, authority to dismiss whistleblower lawsuits filed under the False Claims Act’s qui tam provision even when the government initially elected to allow the whistleblower to proceed with the action.
In a unanimous opinion on Thursday, the Supreme Court rejected an attempt to shift the knowledge standard in False Claims Act cases that had the potential to gut the government’s primary anti-fraud statute.
During oral argument in two consolidated cases on Tuesday, the court seemed poised to reverse the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit and reject a ruling observers said would gut the government’s primary anti-fraud statute.
The False Claims Act has for decades been the government’s primary anti-fraud statute. The Department of Justice has used the law to recover more than $70 billion since 1986, largely in cases related to health care and defense contracting.
The Supreme Court heard oral argument on Tuesday in the case of Dr. Jesse Polansky, a whistleblower who had filed a claim on behalf of the government under the False Claims Act’s qui tam provision.
For decades, the Department of Justice’s government fraud enforcement efforts have been largely driven by whistleblower lawsuits filed under the False Claims Act.