Brett Stuff
Judging the Judges
Term Year: 2018

Cochise Consultancy, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. United States, ex rel. Billy Joe Hunt

Summary Analysis

DATE: 2019-05-13
DOCKET: 18-315
NAME: Cochise Consultancy, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. United States, ex rel. Billy Joe Hunt

   AUTHOR: Thomas
   JOINING: Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh
   GOOD: Yes

Case Commentary

By some miracle, The Court has Decided this case based on "the plain text of the statute".

Me, I'm impressed.

Of course, I don't think there should EVER be any other reading. And if absolutely any other mental, verbal, social, or historical gymnastics are required, the statute should be thrown out.

Qui Tam: is a reward to a citizen for bringing a successful suit to bear on behalf of the government.

Relator: is the name given to the person who files a qui tam suit. They are better known as Whistle Blowers.

Ironically enough (or so, this non-lawyer, near-idiot would have you believe... and if you need more of a disclaimer than that for anything anywhere on this site, please insert it here, as you have been warned), the text of the case seems to indicate that Whistle Blowers have no obligation to act.

Um, I'd nail them with being Accessories, which in this day and age so often means Co-Conspirators.

Beyond that, the case isn't very interesting, it is very much a plain text reading of the law.

If only every case were so simple.

Judging the Judges

Next Entry


So although a plain text reading is appropriate for the law, I'm thinking that whatever (whenever, however, and wherever) I say should be (and therefore, shall be as a condition of accessing this site) mentally massaged until it makes sense after the fact in a way that I find pleasing... much (as it would appear) The Supreme Court is happy to do for the Legislature.

© copyright 2019 Brett Paufler
A Personal Opinion/Editorial