On June 1, the U.S. Supreme Court released its ruling regarding the necessary intent under the False Claims Act (FCA). In consolidated cases Schutte v. SuperValu and Proctor v. Safeway, Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for a unanimous court, explained that the scienter requirement under the FCA is satisfied by a defendant's subjective beliefs about the accuracy of their claims—not the objective standard of what a reasonable person may have believed.

While this decision is regarded as a win for whistleblowers, the court addressed only one question, creating some ambiguity about FCA lawsuits going forward. Here, the court only defined "knowledge" under the FCA. This holding leaves relators uncertain about what facts, and how many, are necessary to establish that a defendant "knew" its claims were false.