[20000726]RS20641_佛蒙特州自然资源署诉美国ex rel史蒂文斯：最高法院限制针对各州的虚假诉讼.pdf

1、1 For a more detailed overview of the structure and history of the False Claims Act, see (name redacted), “Constitutional Aspects of Qui Tam Actions: Background and Analysis of Issues inVermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States ex rel. Stevens,” Congressional ResearchService Report No. RL

2、30463. 2 31 U.S.C. 3729(a)(1)-(7); 3730(b)(1).3 31 U.S.C. 3730(d)(1)-(2).4 Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States ex rel. Stevens, 120 S.Ct. 1858, 1859(2000).Congressional Research Service The Library of CongressCRS Report for CongressReceived through the CRS WebOrder Code RS20641July

3、26, 2000Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. UnitedStates ex rel. Stevens: The Supreme Court LimitsFalse Claims Actions Against States (name redacted)Legislative AttorneyAmerican Law DivisionSummaryIn Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States ex rel Stevens, theSupreme Court considered

4、whether states are “persons” under the False Claims Act(FCA). The Court also addressed the much broader question of whether qui tam relatorsmeet Article III standing requirements. Analyzing the text of the Act as well as the longhistory of qui tam actions, the Court ruled that while relators do have