1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |FY 2019 NDAA – Cyber Focus

FY 2019 NDAA – Cyber Focus

Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.20.18

The 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) includes a robust set of cybersecurity provisions impacting the Defense Industrial Base, including:

  • Encouraging federal agencies to avoid using lowest price technically acceptable source selection criteria in procurements predominately for the acquisition of information technology and cybersecurity services.
  • Establishing a pilot program to oversee Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) handled by contractors with foreign ownership, control, or influence.
  • Requiring DoD to notify Congress of data breaches involving significant losses of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) or other forms of CUI.
  • Encouraging DoD and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to assist small businesses in the Defense Industrial Supply Chain by enhancing cyber threat awareness and training, and helping to conduct voluntary cybersecurity self-assessments.
  • Requiring DoD to obtain disclosures from vendors regarding foreign government access to products or source codes, before acquiring their cybersecurity or information technology products and services.

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