October Term 2022 · Docket 21-1326

Does a False Claims Act violation require an objective legal baseline?

Relators seek damages for SuperValu's pricing claims. SuperValu argues the law lacked a clear standard.

Official caption
U.S., ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu Inc.
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Decided
Sources analyzed through
Post Opinion

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  3. — An official Court opinion was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Singh argued the Act creates three independent ways to prove knowledge.

    He stated that choosing to break correctly interpreted law shows actual knowledge.

    Mr. Phillips argued the case should be viewed as difficult.

    Mr. Stewart addressed questions about internal company meetings discussing legal interpretations.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The False Claims Act penalizes false claims to the government. Relators argue SuperValu knowingly broke the law. SuperValu claims the legal standard was too vague to prove falsity.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 18, 2023.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Relators want the Court to reverse the lower court judgment.

SuperValu wants the Court to affirm the lower court judgment.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Relators argue a defendant can knowingly break the law without prior guidance.

SuperValu argues falsity requires an objective baseline to deviate from.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Thomas asked if a baseline exists to objectively deviate from.

Justice Thomas asked if statements can be false without any guidance.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the standard for proving false claims. It determines when vague laws create liability. It affects all federal contractors and government payers.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Verified official opinions and orders

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON