Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

...a 1986 federal law that awards whistleblowers up to 30% of the recovery.

The qui tam concept is older than that, however. It dates back to the first Congress, which enacted numerous qui tam laws signed by President George Washington

1 posted on 10/26/2024 11:16:05 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: E. Pluribus Unum

Another of DJT’s mistakes heard from


2 posted on 10/26/2024 11:21:20 AM PDT by PIF (They came for me and mine ... now its your turn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

OK, if the left is up in arms over it and bad mouthing the judge, it must have been a good ruling.

So for us non-legalese savvy FReepers, what’s the Cliff Notes version?


3 posted on 10/26/2024 11:21:30 AM PDT by metmom (He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
the government’s war on fraud

Are they joking? The government created epic fraud in every direction when they decided to open our borders to millions from God knows where as they forced the American people at gun point to pay billions annually for all of this fraud and lawlessness.

4 posted on 10/26/2024 11:23:09 AM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

The particular aspect of the law held unconstitutional dates from 1986. The essential concept of the False Claims Act though can be preserved through remedial legislation and changes in judicial and executive procedures.


5 posted on 10/26/2024 11:29:27 AM PDT by Rockingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

” Kathryn Kimball Mizelle”

Beware three name and hyphenated women.


6 posted on 10/26/2024 11:33:40 AM PDT by dljordan (What would Michael Collins do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

So perhaps it is not surprising that......this “Trump judge”.....

this not so subtle editorializing in a supposedly NEWS report....is a primo example of why so many people in Californication don’t read the LASlimes anymore, a paper that once nearly conquered the entire state’s marketplace with editions in Los Angeles, San Diego, Orange County, the Inland Empire, the San Fernando Valley, and San Francisco.

An honest editor could make the article read with far less political bias. And still report any substantive content.
But of course that is not what the LASlimes does.


8 posted on 10/26/2024 11:34:55 AM PDT by faithhopecharity ("Politicians aren't born, they're excreted." Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 to 43 BCE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

There is a reason liberals hate this judge’s decision killing qui tam lawsuits. Justice Thomas and most of the conservatives on the SC are waiting to strike these qui tam lawsuits down. They give standing to private citizens to sue companies and individuals on behalf of the government for alleging companies are overcharging or acting fraudulently on government contracts and collecting a significant percentage of the award. Any tom, Dick or Harry can sue even though they have no connection to the contract. The American bar loves the suits for the same reason they like class action law suits. It is a revenue generator for them and opens up companies to a shooting gallery of of any number of folks looking to win the lottery as well as progressives looking to score political points against business entities.


11 posted on 10/26/2024 11:50:33 AM PDT by chuckee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

1986 is only 38 years ago,
not 150.


12 posted on 10/26/2024 11:51:27 AM PDT by yuleeyahoo (“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!” - the deep-state)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

An important factor in how successful the case is is whether or not the government wants the fraudulent company to succeed. I know of one case a company A was providing material that did not meets the standards set in the government contract and still shipped to company B the material. When the government was notified, the government contacted company B which ultimately changed the requirements so that the material would pass. The government dropped the case and it went no further.


18 posted on 10/26/2024 12:05:24 PM PDT by jimfr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I’d be curious what qui tam laws Washington signed... Somehow I don’t think they’re as egregious as this.


21 posted on 10/26/2024 12:58:42 PM PDT by Skywise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

These laws have been on the books since the Civil War. They are also called Lincoln”s laws.


22 posted on 10/26/2024 1:35:44 PM PDT by tired&retired (Blessings )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

What could possibly go wrong with the idea that private citizens could use the power of the government to go after people they do not like when even the government was not sure if there was actually fraud?


28 posted on 10/26/2024 4:10:30 PM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear ( Not my circus. Not my monkeys. But I can pick out the clowns at 100 yards.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson