← All Cases

Wisconsin Bell, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Heath

No. 23-1127 SCOTUS · Decided Decided SCOTUS
Cert Granted: Jun 17, 2024 Argued: Nov 4, 2024 Decided: Feb 21, 2025
📄 Read the Opinion

Case Overview

Wisconsin Bell, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Heath held that a request for reimbursement submitted to a private intermediary that administers a federal subsidy program can constitute a 'claim' under the False Claims Act when federal funds are at stake. The case arose from the E-Rate program, which subsidizes internet and telecommunications services for schools and libraries through funds managed by a private corporation under FCC oversight. The ruling clarified that FCA liability does not require a direct submission to the federal government.

Decision

Opinion Elena Kagan

Opinion of the Court

Elena Kagan

The Facts

Relator Heath brought a qui tam action alleging that Wisconsin Bell had overcharged the E-Rate program, which reimburses carriers through the Universal Service Administrative Company, a private nonprofit that disburses federally collected funds under FCC regulations. Wisconsin Bell argued that claims submitted to USAC, rather than directly to the federal government, could not be 'false claims' under the FCA.

The Application

History

Wisconsin Bell's reimbursement requests to USAC—a private nonprofit administering federally collected E-Rate funds under FCC oversight—fell squarely within the FCA's reach because the rule extends to fraudulent claims for federal money regardless of whether they traverse a private intermediary. The Court rejected Wisconsin Bell's contention that submission to a private entity rather than a federal agency removed the transaction from the FCA's scope, holding that the federal government's financial interest and supervisory role were sufficient to make USAC-directed claims FCA-covered. This application demonstrates that intermediary status cannot shield fraud: when federal funds are at stake and a private entity operates under government supervision, requests for reimbursement constitute "claims" liable under the FCA.

The Conclusion

**The Court reversed the Seventh Circuit's narrower construction, holding that Wisconsin Bell's reimbursement requests to USAC were FCA-covered claims.** The decision preserves the FCA's reach over fraud in federally funded programs administered through private intermediaries.

CourtSupreme Court of the United States
FiledApr 17, 2024
Judge
CL Statusactive
View on CourtListener →

No circuit court data for this case.

Cert GrantedJun 17, 2024
Statusactive
Filed (CL)Apr 17, 2024
View on CourtListener →

Decision

Opinion Elena Kagan
SCOTUS TMR-520d368f Jul 5, 2026
Subscribe on Substack ↗

This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support