Summary of COVID-19 (Coronavirus) Stimulus Legislation
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.27.20
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), a $2 trillion stimulus package, was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives by a voice vote on March 27, 2020 despite opposition from certain Republican members who were seeking a roll call vote. The package was approved unanimously by the U.S. Senate with a vote of 96-0 on March 25, 2020. It is the third coronavirus emergency response bill considered this month in Congress, which passed the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act on March 6 and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act on March 18.
The CARES Act was first drafted by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), though after significant resistance from Senate Democrats, the final bill text was principally negotiated by Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY). The broad stimulus package is viewed as a compromise and includes:
- Federal grants, loans, and other assistance for small businesses and other businesses disproportionately affected by the coronavirus outbreak
- Additional funding for hospitals and doctors as they brace for continued and increased pressure on their workforce and systems
- Direct financial assistance to individual taxpayers
- An expansion of unemployment insurance
The following PDF provides a summary of the key provisions included in the Act.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
