1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |NIST Now "King of the Hill" on Cyber Standards

NIST Now "King of the Hill" on Cyber Standards

Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.14.13

Following its key cyber role in President Obama's Executive Order No. 13636 issued this February, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) again seized the reins on federal cybersecurity standards on April 30, issuing the 457-page tome, Security and Privacy Controls for Federal information Systems and Organizations, that not only provides the "most comprehensive update" of the core information security controls, but also cuts new ground for cybersecurity standards governing mobile and cloud computing technology, applications security, supply chain protection, advanced persistent threats, and privacy controls for federal agencies and contractors. While some critics have sought to brush back prior NIST standards as too voluminous and technically dense, this latest publication underscores NIST's increasing dominance over cyber standards, as shown by both DoD and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence embracing this NIST update, thus paving the way for federal agencies to flow down new and expanded security standards to government contractors consistent with the executive order's directive to the FAR Council.


Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25

Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality

On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument....

View All Insights