1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Go Ahead and Offer the Senator a Cup of Coffee - Senate Gift Rules Don't Require You to Be Rude, Just Stingy

Go Ahead and Offer the Senator a Cup of Coffee - Senate Gift Rules Don't Require You to Be Rude, Just Stingy

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.21.08

Guidance issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Ethics clarifies that, under the exception for items of little intrinsic value (Rule 35.1(c)(23)), baseball caps, T-shirts, and greeting cards may be accepted by Senators and staff members so long as they have a “reasonable value,” even if worth more than $10.00. The exception also encompasses all other non-perishables, food, flowers, and other perishables that are “brought, sent or delivered” to the Senator’s office and “are not taken as part of a meal,” so long as their value, in the aggregate, does not exceed $10.00. The new guidance also clarifies that the exception for “[f]ood or refreshments of nominal value offered other than as part of a meal” (Rule 35.1(c)(22)) includes hors d’oeuvres, drinks, or a continental-style breakfast served at a reception, briefing, organized event, media interview, or other appearance where such items are commonly provided. (The new guidance fails to clarify one’s obligations, however, if the profile of a reception calls for caviar and high-priced champagne.) These exceptions are of particular importance for organizations that employ or retain lobbyists. Under HLOGA congressional members and staff generally are prohibited from accepting items of value from such entities. To view the new guidance go to http://ethics.senate.gov/.

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