Eric rightly highlights this part of CA11's qui tam ruling. As to what might come next: In Slaughter, SCOTUS was (again) clear that bringing civil suits on behalf of the U.S. requires an exercise of Art. II power. Thus, outside of special Art. IV contexts, qui tam relators exercise power that falls comfortably within SCOTUS's understanding of Art. II. So under Slaughter's logic, qui tam relators must presumably be "controlled by the Chief Executive."
The Take Care Clause and the Vesting Clause challenges are now back before the district court to consider in the first instance. Something to keep an eye on 👀