Meghan Belaski, et al. v. Securities and Exchange Commission

Do the statutory rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission, in order to qualify for whistleblower award, violate the Double Jeopardy Clause in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by requiring a whistleblower to first qualify for a covered-action before they are eligible for a related-action in which the same materials are required to be used in both instances before a whistleblower is eligible for a related-action award, and when confidential, non-public, personal whistleblower information considered private intellectual property borne out of independent analysis, is submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (Office of the Whistleblower), and is given to another federal entity by the Securities and Exchange Commission (Office of the Whistleblower), and used to garnish a massive civil settlement for the public good, but fails to provide just compensation to the whistleblower in a related-action award because they didn’t first qualify for a covered-action award, do the statutory requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission violate the Double Jeopardy and Takings Clause in the Fifth Aunendment of the U.S. Constitution?