1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Trade Winds: Federal Government Announces Next Commercial Offshore Wind Leasing Auction

Trade Winds: Federal Government Announces Next Commercial Offshore Wind Leasing Auction

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.18.13

On December 17, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management announced a 60-day public comment period  for a proposed auction process designed to open nearly 80,000 acres offshore Maryland for commercial wind energy leasing. The announcement, which follows recent auctions of 112,000 acres offshore Virginia and 164,000 acres offshore Rhode Island and Massachusetts, is the latest in a series of actions by the federal government designed to increase wind and other renewable energy production and to facilitate the development of new clean technology industries generally (previously discussed here, here, here, and here).

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....