Page:U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Executive Health Resources.pdf/26

Rh

, with whom joins, concurring.

I join the Court’s opinion in full. I add only that I agree with that “[t]here are substantial arguments that the qui tam device is inconsistent with Article II and that private relators may not represent the interests of the United States in litigation.”  (dissenting opinion). In my view, the Court should consider the competing arguments on the Article II issue in an appropriate case.