ADMC Program | Horse Racing Free Tips

Weekly Stewards and Commissions Rulings, Feb. 6 – Feb. 12

News — Wed, 14 Feb 2024 23:28:38 +0000

Every week, the TDN posts a roundup of the relevant Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA)-related rulings from around the country.

Among this week's rulings, trainer Jonathan Wong has been suspended for two years and fined $25,000 for a post-race metformin positive from last June.

Wong told the TDN he has appealed the ruling which could now go before the Federal Trade Commission, head to federal court, or both. He also said that he would seek a temporary injunction against the ban.

Trainer Kari Craddock was issued a seven-day suspension for a post-race Methocarbamol positive. Methocarbamol is a Class C controlled medication, a first offense for which comes a possible $500 fine and loss of purse. This was Craddock's second Methocarbamol-related violation since HISA's Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) program went into effect.

Trainer Ismael Bahena has also been provisionally suspended after Bahena's trainee, Color Field, tested positive for methamphetamine–a banned substance under HISA and a ubiquitous drug of human abuse–when winning at Horseshoe Indianapolis on Oct. 30. HIWU has now brought 11 methamphetamine-related cases for adjudication since the ADMC program went into effect.

NEW HISA/HIWU STEWARDS RULINGS

The following rulings were reported on HISA's “rulings” portal and through the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU)'s “pending” and “resolved” cases portals.

Resolved ADMC Violations

Date: 01/06/2024

Licensee: Monte Gelrod, trainer

Penalty: Written reprimand. Admission.

Explainer: For the presence of Omeprazole-Controlled Medication (Class C)-in a sample taken from Salto de Tigre. This was a possible violation of Rule 3312-Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 01/13/2024

Licensee: Jay Nehf, trainer

Penalty: A fine of $3,000; imposition of 3 Penalty Points. Admission.

Explainer: A possible violation of Rule 3314-Use or Attempted Use of a Controlled Medication Substance or a Controlled Medication Method-on the horse, Customer List. This was also a possible violation of Rule 4222-Intra-Articular Injections Within Seven (7) Days of Timed and Reported Workout.

Date: 01/21/2024

Licensee: Fernando Abreu, trainer

Penalty: A fine of $3,000; imposition of 3 Penalty Points. Admission.

Explainer: A possible violation of Rule 3314-Use or Attempted Use of a Controlled Medication Substance or a Controlled Medication Method-on the horse, Sugar N Spice. This was also a possible violation of Rule 4222-Intra-Articular Injections Within Seven (7) Days of Timed and Reported Workout.

Date: 01/07/2024

Licensee: Jose Delgado, trainer

Penalty: Disqualification of Covered Horse's Race results, including forfeiture of all purses and other compensation, prizes, trophies, points, and rankings and repayment or surrender (as applicable); a fine of $500; imposition of 1.5 Penalty Points. Admission.

Explainer: For the presence of Dexamethasone-Controlled Medication (Class C)-in a sample taken from Buff Hello, who finished third at Gulfstream Park on 1/7/23. This was a possible violation of Rule 3312-Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 11/20/2023

Licensee: Kari Craddock, trainer

Penalty: 7-day period of Ineligibility, beginning on February 14, 2024; Disqualification of Covered Horse's Race results, including forfeiture of all purses and other compensation, prizes, trophies, points, and rankings and repayment or surrender (as applicable); a fine of $1,000; imposition of 1.5 Penalty Points. Admission.

Explainer: For the presence of Methocarbamol-Controlled Medication (Class C)-in a sample taken from Ekati's Hit, who finished second at Remington Park on 11/20/23. This was a possible violation of Rule 3312-Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 12/13/2023

Licensee: Darien Rodriguez, trainer

Explainer: For the presence of Dexamethasone-Controlled Medication (Class C)-in a sample taken from Charlotte the Brit, who finished second at Tampa Bay on 12/13/23. This was a possible violation of Rule 3312-Presence of Controlled Medication Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers (Post-Race/Vets' List).

Date: 06/01/2023

Licensee: Jonathan Wong, trainer

Penalty: 2-year period of Ineligibility for Covered Person, beginning on July 1, 2023; Disqualification of Covered Horse's Race results, including forfeiture of all purses and other compensation, prizes, trophies, points, and rankings and repayment or surrender (as applicable); a fine of $25,000; payment of $8,000 of HIWU's arbitration costs. Final decision by arbitral body.

Explainer: For the presence of Metformin-a banned substance-in a sample taken from Heaven and Earth, who won at Horseshoe Indianapolis on 6/1/23. This was a possible violation of Rule 3212-Presence of a Banned Substance and/or its Metabolites or Markers.

Post-Race Samples From 2023 Breeders’ Cup Cleared By HIWU

News — Thu, 16 Nov 2023 23:02:02 +0000

All post-race test samples taken from contenders in the 2023 Breeders' Cup World Championships at Santa Anita Park earlier this month have been cleared by the Horseracing Integrity & Welfare Unit (HIWU).

2023 marked the first year the Breeders' Cup World Championships were run under the full jurisdiction of the Horseracing Integrity & Safety Authority (HISA), including the Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) Program, which took effect in May of this year and is implemented and enforced by HIWU.

As was the case under Breeders' Cup's anti-doping and medication control rules that were in place before HISA's ADMC Program was implemented, medication is prohibited within 48 hours of the 14 Championship races and the undercard. All potential Breeders' Cup competitors were also subject to out-of-competition testing for banned substances.

The post Post-Race Samples From 2023 Breeders’ Cup Cleared By HIWU appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The post Post-Race Samples From 2023 Breeders’ Cup Cleared By HIWU first appeared on Horse Racing Free Tips.

Trainer Lynch Plans Appeal After HIWU Arbitrator Imposes 4-Year Banned Substances Suspension

News — Tue, 14 Nov 2023 00:37:06 +0000

Natalia Lynch, a Belmont Park-based trainer who has been licensed since 2020, has been penalized with a four-year suspension and a $50,000 fine after a Nov. 9 Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU) arbitration judgment found her to be in violation of two separate anti-doping rules, one for the presence of a banned substance (Altrenogest) in a horse, and another for possession of a different prohibited drug (Thyro-L).

Lynch's attorney, John Mac Hayes, told TDN Monday that the trainer plans to appeal the arbitration result to a Federal Trade Commission administrative law judge.

A post-race drug screening revealed Altrenogest in Motion to Strike (Competitive Edge) after Lynch shipped the gelding to Monmouth Park for a June 24 race.

Motion to Strike ran fourth as the 7-10 favorite, and a $5,000 claim was subsequently voided after the HIWU test results came back positive.

Altrenogest is sold under the several brand names, including Regu-Mate. It is used in veterinary medicine to suppress or synchronize estrus in female horses and pigs.

The website of the National Library of Medicine states that Altrenogest is “a commonly used progestogen for the suppression of oestrus and associated distracting behaviors that interfere with training and performance of female racehorses.”

The website also notes that Altrenogest is “structurally similar to the anabolic androgenic steroid.”

However, Matt Hegarty of DRF.com, who was first to report on Lynch's penalties, pointed out a notable coincidence regarding Lynch's Nov. 9 arbitration judgment and a separate document released by the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) Nov. 13 regarding proposed changes to the Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) program: The HISA Authority, Hegarty wrote, wants to reclassify Altrenogest as a controlled substance instead of its more severe “banned” status, “with recommended penalties starting at a fine of $500.” (The status change for Altrenogest was just one among numerous proposed rules changes outlined here.)

According to the decision written by arbitrator Bernetta Bush, a retired judge, when a HIWU investigator met Lynch at Belmont on July 20 to notify her of the Altrenogest adverse analytical finding, a search of the vehicle Lynch was driving revealed a container of Thyro-L, which is also banned under the ADMC rules.

Lynch had argued that the Altrenogest positive was cross-contamination as a result of Regu-Mate lawfully being administered to a filly that was supposedly housed in the stall next to Motion to Strike.

As for the Thyro-L, Lynch stated that earlier in the spring, she attempted to discard that newly banned substance by giving it to her mother. Yet she did not realize the drug had remained in her mother's vehicle instead of being thrown away. According to the arbitrator's report, Lynch said she was only driving her mother's vehicle on July 20 because she had lost the keys to her own car.

The arbitrator didn't buy the reasoning in either argument.

“Taken as a whole, Trainer Lynch has presented mere speculation, rather than competent evidence, regarding the source of the Altrenogest,” Bush wrote.

“[T]he uncontested evidence provided by Gregory Pennock, an investigator for the Agency whose testimony the Arbitrator credits as consistent with the record and not disputed with competent evidence, establishes that [the filly] was several–five to seven–stalls away from the Covered Horse, and that [the filly] had not been administered Altrenogest for five days before the day the sample was collected from [Motion to Strike],” Bush wrote.

“The record establishes that Altrenogest is administered orally and would have to be administered directly into the horse's mouth for contamination to occur, and that the amount detected in the sample is consistent with ingestion within 24 hours.”

Bush's ruling continued: “In connection with attempting to skirt liability, Trainer Lynch appears to have made many misrepresentations or inconsistent statements of fact which detract from the overall credibility of her testimony…. More specifically, regarding the Rules, the Arbitrator finds that Trainer Lynch bears significant fault for the presence of Altrenogest. This is not a case of simple negligence.

“Not only has Trainer Lynch failed to show any benign manner in which the substance entered the Covered Horse (a critical failure), but even if she had, Trainer Lynch had (and breached) a clear and unmistakable duty to protect the Covered Horse from any cross-contamination and otherwise comply with the Rules. No evidence presented mitigates the responsibility placed on Trainer Lynch by the Rules she is charged with disobeying.”

Taking up the charge of the Thyro-L, the arbitrator noted that Lynch had argued that her possession was not intentional, that she “wasn't trying to cheat,” and that none of the horses under her care had ever tested positive for that substance.

“Trainer Lynch offers many arguments to escape liability or mitigate the consequences of her unlawful possession, but none are persuasive such that she can carry her burden,” Bush wrote.

Hayes, Lynch's lawyer, classified the arbitrator's penalties as “unreasonably harsh.”

In a series of emailed bullet points, Hayes told TDN that the arbitrator “improperly discounted” expert testimony that was presented in Lynch's defense.

Hayes wrote that the arbitrator allegedly also “ignored the Federal Rules of Evidence and Civil Procedure” that have been established by the U.S. Supreme Court and instead “relied on International Law wholly inapplicable in federal court proceedings.”

Hayes also wrote that Regu-Mate is “not a doping agent” and that “no evidence of doping exists.”

Hayes added that the arbitrator allegedly “completely ignored” a different Regu-Mate positive “in a different horse who resided in the same barn where Natalia's horse had stood before racing.”

Hayes further claimed that “HIWU's own expert testified HIWU should have investigated the two positives coming from the same barn to determine if they might be related.”

According to a 2020 profile written by the Monmouth Park press office, Lynch, a Maryland native, had been enrolled in nursing school at Towson University when she started galloping horses a few years ago.

Lynch originally wanted to become a jockey, but switched her aspirations to training, the profile stated. She worked as an assistant to Brittany Russell, Jeremiah Englehart, and Ray Handal prior to getting licensed as a trainer, going out on her own three years ago when owner Al Gold offered to let her train nine horses from his Gold Square, LLC, stable.

The post Trainer Lynch Plans Appeal After HIWU Arbitrator Imposes 4-Year Banned Substances Suspension appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The post Trainer Lynch Plans Appeal After HIWU Arbitrator Imposes 4-Year Banned Substances Suspension first appeared on Horse Racing Free Tips.

HISA Proposes $80.9 Million 2024 Budget

News — Fri, 25 Aug 2023 21:29:51 +0000

The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority (HISA) has released its proposed budget for 2024, totaling $80.96 million, including $38.7 million earmarked for the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU), the drug testing arm of the federal program.

The total fee assessments for the states and racetracks come out to $78.5 million, but available credits potentially bring that number down to $59.8 million.

HISA's 2023 total budget was initially set at $72.5 million. That number was subsequently revised down to $66.4 million earlier this year.

The proposed 2024 budget was issued on Aug. 17, but the opportunity to publicly comment on it ended on Thursday, Aug. 24.

While the proposed budget is listed as a press release on the HISA website, it was not sent out in wide circulation via email like other HISA press releases. On Aug. 9, however, the Authority included in an email on 2022 tax filings a warning that the budget would be released “in the coming days.”

The proposed budget is broken down among the following HISA-related departments: the racetrack safety program, the Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) program, technology, and administration costs.

Among the big-ticket items, $21.2 million has been allocated for lab testing and $9.5 million for “professional services.”

The latter is a broad category denoting things like “external support for critical functions ranging from arbitration fees to companies that support our IT infrastructure and man our help desk,” explained HISA spokesperson Mandy Minger.

Some $3.6 million is set aside for legal fees, including the cost of lawsuits.

Total revenues from fines related to the racetrack safety and ADMC programs, along with other sources of income like those from lab testing, come to $3.6 million.

According to Minger, these revenues will be used to reduce the net expenses, “and therefore reduce the 2024 assessments.”

Nearly $23 million of HIWU's $38.7 million operating budget goes toward “collection costs,” with $6.7 million going toward salaries.

The total price tag of operating the entire ADMC program–which includes that for HIWU, as well as drug testing and adjudication cost—comes to $59.5 million.

The Authority's loan repayments total $1.25 million.

In a May Q&A, HISA CEO Lisa Lazarus told the TDN that The Jockey Club, the Breeders' Cup and the NTRA had all provided loans to the program, and that they were “pretty much no interest” loans designed to cover short-term operational costs.

While the proposed budget for next year is more detailed than previous iterations, it is still lacking in granular line-item details explaining exactly how the money is being used, said National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association (HBPA) CEO Eric Hamelback.

“We are not surprised by the increase [from 2022 totals], but here we are once again not able to truly assess the budget due to the lack of transparency in the breakdown of the figures,” said Hamelback.

Individual racing commissions can choose to cover the assessed fee for the state–broadly speaking, a figure calculated on a formula based on total starts and purses.

Where commissions enter into a voluntary agreement with the Authority for existing personnel to conduct tasks like sample collection, conducting investigations, and adjudicating violations, the state is privy to a credit on its total assessment.

According to the proposed budget for next year, the total to be assessed comes to $78.5 million, with $18.7 million available in industry credits.

The states that decline to cover these financial assessments pass the burden of responsibility onto the racetracks in the state.

Yet to be issued, the 2024 fee assessments for the states and racetracks must be made public by Nov. 1 this year.

“We anticipate that the assessment will be released in October,” said Minger, who added that the same formula to assess these fees will be used again.

The current state and racetrack assessments are a bone of contention among various racing jurisdictions, however.

According to Hamelback, several states are “looking at the possibilities” for next year “of not sending their signal out in order to maintain racing” because of the financial burden posed by these fees.

Such a move would mirror the state of Texas, which has maintained since the advent of HISA a blackout on sending its simulcasting signal out of state in order to operate outside of the federal program's jurisdiction.

Hamelback added, however, he was not positioned to publicly name the states considering this option.

The post HISA Proposes $80.9 Million 2024 Budget appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The post HISA Proposes $80.9 Million 2024 Budget first appeared on Horse Racing Free Tips.

HISA Schedules Sept. 7 ADMC Town Hall Webinar

News — Wed, 23 Aug 2023 22:21:41 +0000

The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority (HISA) will host a Town Hall webinar Sept. 7 at 12:30 p.m. ET to address questions about the Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) Program. It will be the first webinar in an anticipated series to connect industry participants with HISA leadership. Both HISA and the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU) leadership will be on hand during the webinar to provide clarity on the ADMC Program's rules, regulations, processes, and procedures.

The webinar is open to anyone in racing. Registration is now open and participants are encouraged to submit questions on the registration form regarding the ADMC Program.

HISA CEO Lisa Lazarus will host the webinar, with speakers including HIWU Executive Director Ben Mosier, HIWU Chief of Science Dr. Mary Scollay, HIWU General Counsel Michelle Pujals, and HIWU Chief of Operations Kate Mittelstadt.

The post HISA Schedules Sept. 7 ADMC Town Hall Webinar appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The post HISA Schedules Sept. 7 ADMC Town Hall Webinar first appeared on Horse Racing Free Tips.

Q&A: HISA’s Anti-Doping and Medication Control Program

News — Mon, 10 Jul 2023 22:54:52 +0000

The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act's (HISA) drug control program has encountered some choppy waters since its launch on May 22, encapsulated by events surrounding the law's rules on intra-articular joint injections.

At the end of last month, HISA CEO Lisa Lazarus explained that the Authority–the non-profit umbrella broadly overseeing implementation of the federal law–had temporarily suspended full enforcement of its rules surrounding intra-articular joint injections prior to workouts.

Under HISA's rules as written, trainers are prohibited from giving their horse intra-articular joint injections within 14 days prior to the post-time of a race, and within seven days prior to any timed and reported workout. A violation of these rules could result in a 60-day suspension for the trainer.

According to an announcement dated June 26, the prohibition of such injections within seven days prior to a workout shall be enforced only by making the horse ineligible to race for a period of 30 days. This temporary measure will last until July 15, 2023. HISA had also issued a bulletin to stakeholders on June 23 stating the new policy.

The decision was made, explained Lazarus, because of general confusion surrounding the rules among horsemen. Between 15 and 20 trainers had breached the rule surrounding intra-articular joint injections prior to a workout.

Lazarus said that the names of the suspended horses would be publicly issued. But when pressed by the TDN, the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit–which implements HISA's anti-doping and medication control (ADMC) program–initially responded that the names of these horses would not be made public.

On Friday, HIWU reversed course and issued the names of the horses in question. The list shows that nine of the horses in question had competed during the period of their 30-day ineligibility to race. Three had won. The 30-day ineligibility to race was made for the welfare of the horse, Lazarus had initially explained.

Because of various questions raised over this episode, as well as other issues raised by readers over the past few weeks, the TDN has decided to maintain a Q&A surrounding the rollout of HISA's anti-doping and medication control program. The answers to the questions come from representatives from either HISA or HIWU.

Over the next few days and weeks, this Q&A will be updated as more questions are fielded, and as the TDN receives answers from HISA and HIWU.

TDN: How much does a split sample cost?

The cost of a split sample to test for a Banned Substance is $2,000. The cost of a split sample to test for a Controlled Medication is $1,200.

TDN: Why does it cost substantially more than had typically been the case for a split sample?

Fees were negotiated with the laboratories to ensure expedited reporting timelines and uniformity in testing standards.

TDN: In instances of a provisional hearing after a positive finding for a banned substance (and before the full hearing before an arbitral body of 1-3 persons): Who specifically arbitrates that hearing? And where is that hearing held?

The Provisional Hearings are arbitrated by a member of the Arbitral Body, which is selected by JAMS. The hearing may be held by phone/video conference call.

TDN: How much does the provisional hearing cost?

The cost depends upon the time required by the arbitrator. The Covered Person does not pay any of the costs up front and has the option to request that HISA/HIWU cover the full cost rather than splitting them with the Covered Person.

TDN: What is the timing of that hearing? Does HIWU always wait for the split sample to be returned before holding that hearing, for example?

Timing depends on how quickly an arbitrator can be cleared of conflicts and schedules with all parties can be coordinated. HIWU does not wait for the B sample (split sample) to come back before holding the hearing.

TDN: What happens when a trainer is provisionally suspended? Can that trainer's horses be transferred to the trainer's assistant? Or are horses required to be transferred to a person unconnected with the stable? Does the numeral size of a barn have any bearing on this decision?

When a trainer is Provisionally Suspended, they may not participate in any activity involving Covered Horses as well as any activity taking place at a racetrack or training facility. This means that the Covered Person cannot be involved in any direct care or conditioning of their Covered Horses.

However, the Covered Person can make arrangements for other individuals to oversee the care, wellbeing, and training of their Covered Horses. Trainers subject to Provisional Suspensions are not required to formally transfer their Covered Horses to another trainer via the HISA portal unless they want the horses to be eligible to participate in Timed and Reported Workouts and/or Covered Horseraces.

Regardless of the transfer status in the HISA portal, a Provisionally Suspended Covered Person may not oversee the daily care of their horses.

During a Provisional Suspension, horses cannot be transferred to the trainer's assistant(s). Transfer requirements are applicable regardless of the stable's size.

TDN: In regards claimed horses that have a subsequent post-race positive: Who pays for the split sample? The owner of the horse before it was claimed? Or the new owner who claimed the horse?

The owner of the horse before it was claimed.

TDN: If the horse in question runs back and wins before the test results come back, would that win result in an automatic DQ?

No, assuming all samples collected in connection with that race are negative.

TDN: If the horse in question runs back and wins before the test results come back, and fails a post-race test for the same substance, would the previous trainer or the new trainer be held liable?

This would depend on the specific circumstances of the case (e.g., dates of races, substance(s) detected).

TDN: HISA CEO Lisa Lazarus initially explained that the 15-20 horses that had been administered an intra-articular joint injection too close to a workout (and which were made ineligible to race for 30 days) would be made public by HIWU. When TDN asked HIWU about this public disclosure, the organization initially stated that these horses would not be made public. HIWU has since changed its mind. What was the reason for the initial confusion? And why did HIWU change course?

Since no violation was being enforced against the trainers of these horses, HIWU was not and is not required to disclose the names of the horses affected. Notices of potential violations are not considered proven or adjudicated violations.

However, HIWU ultimately disclosed the names and will continue to do so in the name of transparency and at the request of HISA.

TDN: How did HIWU/HISA land upon this 30-day ineligibility to race when the stand down period for intra-articular joint injections before a race is 14-days?

The rules (4320) state that Covered Horses who breezed less than seven days or raced less than 14 days after an IA joint injection become ineligible to race or breeze for one month following the date of the injection(s).

TDN: How was it that horses on the list who were supposedly ineligible to race actually ran? Who at HISA or HIWU was responsible for this lapse? Will responsible parties face any consequences?

Furthermore, of these 15-20 horses that violated the intra-articular workout rule (and made ineligible to race for 30 days) will you take any actions regarding those horses who subsequently ran during the period of their suspension?

HIWU had not anticipated the large volume of violations related to this rule and given the newness of the ADMC program HIWU processed and notified the cases as quickly as they could. The horsemen continued to train and race their horses prior to receiving any notification, therefore they will not receive any penalties.

HISA is reviewing the rule and procedures and will make an announcement prior to July 15 on the status of the rule and related procedures subsequent to July 15. Additionally, there were numerous other potential ADMC violations that needed to be investigated and/or processed, creating a much larger than expected workload. HISA and HIWU's top priority is the safety and welfare of each horse and measures have been taken to address these operational concerns.

The post Q&A: HISA’s Anti-Doping and Medication Control Program appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The post Q&A: HISA’s Anti-Doping and Medication Control Program first appeared on Horse Racing Free Tips.

Legal Expert: If Fifth Circuit Finds HISA Constitutional, Texas “Absolutely” Can Implement Law

News — Wed, 24 May 2023 20:04:35 +0000

Like rival boxers primped and posturing, proponents of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) and the Texas Racing Commission (TXRC) have taken to their respective corners during the unfolding legal fight over the law and have remained un-budged.

At stake is the lucrative business of nationally beaming Texas's simulcast wagering signal.

The TXRC initially took the stance that it is legally prohibited from permitting Texan tracks to export their signals. Then at the start of February, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals sent the congressionally amended version of HISA down to the district courts for further review.

The Texas commission interpreted this action as meaning that HISA is “facially unconstitutional and therefore has no effect on the State of Texas,” seemingly opening the door to Texas tracks once again engaging in interstate simulcasting.

As of writing, no Texas-based track has adopted that policy, and the simulcasting signal remains flatlined. Furthermore, just this May, the federal court judge out of the Northern District of Texas, Lubbock Division, found this version of HISA as constitutional. The case has now been appealed back up to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

In the meantime, though purses in the state remain fairly stable, the tracks are taking a huge financial knock, and horsemen there are raising concerns about other ancillary impacts on their businesses. Some of the horsemen are now asking: Can HISA be implemented in the state in order to facilitate the interstate simulcasting signal?

The TXRC has taken the stance that state law bars HISA from being implemented in the state unless it is replaced or altered to become a cooperative agreement grant program–an alternative financial and regulatory model for the federal government to cooperate with individual states.

Amy Cook | Courtesy of Amy Cook

Even then, “our statute doesn't even allow us to take grants,” TXRC executive director, Amy Cook, told the TDN last week.

“We've actually made a request to have our statute conform, so, if HISA did become a cooperative agreement grant program, and the [Federal Trade Commission] FTC became a grantor, we could actually take that money and work with HISA. That's the only pathway I see,” Cook added.

In a follow-up email, Phil Fountain, the TXRC's chief of staff, pointed to a previously released commission “fact-sheet” broadly outlining its legal argument. The fact-sheet cites the Texas Racing Act, which directs the commission to “regulate and supervise each racing meeting in this state” that involves wagering.

“There is no provision for the Texas Racing Commission to cede this authority to another party. This means there is no preemption of Texas law under HISA's opt-in structure because HISA does not regulate pari-mutuel horseracing activities,” wrote Fountain.

A legal analysis put together for HISA by the law firm Akin Gump takes the opposite stance. It finds that HISA indeed preempts the Texas law that the commission says confers it exclusive authority to regulate all matters relating to horseracing.

Furthermore, under HISA and state law, the TXRC can implement HISA and still continue to regulate matters outside the reach of HISA's jurisdictions, the Akin Gump analysis finds.

“There is no legal impediment to reversal of the Texas Racing Commission's self-destructive policy decision of restricting interstate wagering on horse racing. Under State and federal law, the Commission may continue to regulate horse racing in Texas to the extent not preempted by HISA rules,” the analysis for HISA finds.

Which side stands on the sturdiest legal legs?

For an independent take on the dispute, the TDN spoke with Daniel Rodriguez, former dean of the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law and former Minerva House Drysdale Regents Chair in Law at the University of Texas, Austin.

Prior to being asked to sort through the legal bones of the matter, Rodriguez said that he was unaware both of the HISA legislation passed into law at the end of 2020 and of the legal conflict that has arisen in Texas.

His answers hinge on the looming decision in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which is set to rule on the constitutionality of the congressionally amended version of HISA. That ruling, however, could still take a number of months.

“What the Fifth Circuit is being asked to do is rule on a matter of federal constitutional law, just as they were asked to do on the ruling back in 2022, when the Fifth Circuit struck down the statute as violating what they call the private non-delegation doctrine,” he said.

If the court rules in tandem with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals–which recently found the revised HISA statute constitutional–there is “absolutely nothing” in Texas statute that bars HISA from being implemented in the state, he said. “That we can all agree on–even the lawyers for the Texas racing commission.”

When asked about the Texas commission's stance–that state law bars HISA's implementation in Texas, irrespective of any court ruling in its constitutionality–Rodriguez called it “foolishness” as well as “head-scratching.”

In other words, what the commission is saying in that scenario is that “I can't comply with the law,” he said, before describing the stance as a policy posture rather than a solid legal argument.

“I lived in Texas for five years so I get to say that this is typical Texan intransigence,” Rodriguez said.

At the same time, Texas could indeed enter into a cooperative agreement grant program with the federal government, if HISA were structured that way, said Rodriguez. “You certainly could implement [HISA] through a regional compact. But Congress has chosen a different mechanism,” he added.

Sam Houston Race Park | Coady Photography

On the flip side, however, if the Fifth Circuit rules that the amended version of HISA remains unconstitutional–just as it ruled on the prior version of HISA–then the TXRC would be correct in barring HISA implementation in the state, said Rodriguez.

Rodriguez declined to weigh in on whether HISA could be implemented in Texas currently–that is, before the Fifth Circuit ruling drops–explaining that he had not researched the legal landscape of the question enough to opine on the matter.

More within Rodriguez's wheelhouse are the ideological whims and fancies of the various Courts of Appeals–including the Fifth Circuit.

“The Fifth Circuit has a reputation for being an eccentric court of appeals–they've reached judgments in the past that leave us law professors to scratch our heads and wonder exactly why their views are so outside the mainstream of other circuit courts. They do what they do,” he said.

When asked which way he thought the Fifth Circuit would rule on the constitutionality of the congressionally amended version of HISA, Rodriguez sided with the federal government. “I really don't anticipate the Fifth Circuit striking it down as unconstitutional,” he said.

In that scenario, said Rodriguez, the plaintiffs would likely file a petition of certiorari with the Supreme Court–a request that the Supreme Court orders a lower court to send the case up to them for review.

But in that instance, there would be no obvious “circuit split” between the Fifth and Sixth Circuit Courts of Appeals for the Supreme Court to weigh in on and consider, meaning it's unlikely the highest court of the land would take the case, he said.

“It's always important for those of us to check our biases, no matter how much expertise we have as law professors,” said Rodriguez.

“But in a nutshell, the issue is, 'can Congress, consistent with their authority, delegate authority to an administrative agency whose constitutionality has never been questioned–I'm talking the FTC–to establish rules for Thoroughbred horse racing?' And the answer to that now is clearly, 'yes,'” he said.

The post Legal Expert: If Fifth Circuit Finds HISA Constitutional, Texas “Absolutely” Can Implement Law appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The post Legal Expert: If Fifth Circuit Finds HISA Constitutional, Texas “Absolutely” Can Implement Law first appeared on Horse Racing Free Tips.

HIWU Resources for Relaunch of ADMC Program

News — Wed, 17 May 2023 22:20:57 +0000

The Horseracing Integrity & Welfare Unit (HIWU)'s website has a number of educational materials to assist with the relaunch of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety (HISA) Authority's Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) Program, which is slated for May 22.

Among the downloads available are:

Additional resources are available on the HIWU website under Education & Resources in PDF format for download.

The post HIWU Resources for Relaunch of ADMC Program appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The post HIWU Resources for Relaunch of ADMC Program first appeared on Horse Racing Free Tips.

FTC: Latest Anti-HISA Suit Doesn’t Come ‘Within a Furlong’ of Demonstrating Harms

News — Tue, 16 May 2023 20:38:34 +0000

The Arkansas-based lawsuit filed six weeks ago that is the most recent among five separate federal complaints attempting to derail the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) via alleged constitutionality claims was broadly rebuffed Monday in separate legal filings by the defendants in the case, who are executives with the HISA Authority and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

The plaintiffs, led by Bill Walmsley, president of the Arkansas Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association (HBPA), and Jon Moss, the executive director of the Iowa HBPA, had asked a judge in United States District Court (Eastern District of Arkansas, Northern Division) on Apr. 6 to declare HISA unlawful and to impose an injunction prohibiting the defendants from enforcing the Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) rules scheduled to go into effect May 22.

The HISA Authority's opposition brief stated that the plaintiffs in this case, much like those in the other four cases currently swirling in the federal court system, represent only “a faction of the industry long opposed to any change” who continue to “search for a favorable forum” by essentially making similar arguments in front of different judges.

And, the HISA Authority's filing pointed out, both Walmsley and Moss are already involved as parties who have taken various legal actions in three of the other four anti-HISA cases.

“Apparently discontent with those courts' rulings, the Iowa HBPA, Walmsley, and Moss now seek the same extraordinary relief here,” the HISA Authority's May 15 filing stated.

The HBPA-affiliated plaintiffs wrote in their complaint last month that HISA “barely pretends to comply with the Constitution's separation of powers. The Act allows a private corporation to issue binding rules with no guiding principle. The FTC's ostensible oversight serves as a mere mirage.”

The HISA Authority saw the situation differently in its filing.

“The vast majority of industry participants and horseracing states have welcomed the uniform national standards, which took effect on July 1, 2022. Two [presidential] administrations have now supported the law and two bipartisan Congresses have embraced it–including through a statutory amendment that reinforced the Act's constitutionality in December 2022,” the HISA Authority's filing stated.

“Plaintiffs come nowhere near the showing required for a court to dismantle this critical federal regulatory program. Most notably, Plaintiffs cannot demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits: All four federal judges that have considered Congress's recent amendment to HISA have concluded that the Act is constitutionally sound,” the HISA Authority's filing stated.

“Plaintiffs next rely on a meritless public nondelegation claim that the challengers in the other cases wisely abandoned, or did not consider worth [pursuing], in light of the clear intelligible principles Congress provided,” the HISA Authority's filing stated.

“And Plaintiffs' final claim under the Appointments Clause is contradicted by the undisputed fact that the Authority is not a governmental entity [and] by the decisions of the two federal courts that have already denied the same Article II claim,” the HISA Authority's filing continued.

“None of the other preliminary injunction factors favor Plaintiffs, either. Plaintiffs fail to show irreparable harm: They have been subject to HISA's racetrack safety rules for over 10 months and to similar anti-doping rules under State law for years; purses in Arkansas and Iowa have surged; and the racing season in Arkansas has now ended,” the HISA Authority's filing stated.

“The balance of harms and the public interest also weigh heavily against disrupting a federal regulatory scheme that Congress has mandated (twice) and that has enjoyed substantial compliance already,” the HISA Authority's filing stated. “This Court should deny Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction.”

The FTC's May 15 filing put it this way: “[The plaintiffs] do not come within a furlong of demonstrating, with evidence, that any purported 'harm is certain and great and of such imminence that there is a clear and present need for equitable relief.'”

The post FTC: Latest Anti-HISA Suit Doesn’t Come ‘Within a Furlong’ of Demonstrating Harms appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The post FTC: Latest Anti-HISA Suit Doesn’t Come ‘Within a Furlong’ of Demonstrating Harms first appeared on Horse Racing Free Tips.

NHBPA Again Goes to Court to Try and Halt May 22 ADMC Launch

News — Mon, 08 May 2023 22:18:51 +0000

With another appeal in the pipeline for its constitutionality lawsuit that is trying to derail the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA), the National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association (NHBPA) has once again asked a federal judge in Texas to grant in injunction that would delay the May 22 implementation of the HISA Authority's Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) program.

The motion for injunction pending appeal was filed on Friday, one day after United States District Court Judge James Wesley Hendrix ruled that the revamped version of HISA that got signed into law back in December was indeed constitutional, clearing the way for the ADMC's thrice-delayed launch.

On Monday, May 8, Hendrix sped along the litigation process by ordering the defendants in the case, who are personnel from the HISA Authority and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), to file a response to the NHBPA's injunction request by Thursday, May 11.

“The Court previously denied injunctive relief, but the plaintiffs again request an injunction, arguing that they will be injured by the ADMC rule during the pendency of an expected appeal,” Hendrix wrote.

The May 5 filing by the NHBPA explained the reasoning behind the request this way:

“An injunction is necessary because the industry cannot endure 'seismic change' in the short term that is undone shortly thereafter. The courts should not put the industry on a roller-coaster where the ADMC rules are in effect from May 22 to, say, Nov. 18 (the date of the last Fifth Circuit decision), and then they go out of effect again if the Fifth Circuit finds the amended law unconstitutional.”

The NHBPA filing continued:

“This Court has now considered the case a second time, and again the Court has upheld the act. Though the Court ultimately concluded the Horsemen did not present a winning case, it should conclude that at minimum they presented a substantial case, which is less than successful, but more than non-negligible.

“[The NHBPA] won at the Fifth Circuit last time around, with arguments the Sixth Circuit panel would have also adopted as to the original version [of the HISA law]. They have returned to this Court with a serious case as to the amended version of the statute. Though they did not win, they have at least established a 'fair prospect' or reasonable possibility of success on appeal…”

“Moreover, the Horsemen have presented additional arguments concerning the budget and the original meaning which also plausibly demonstrate that the FTC does not have pervasive surveillance and control over the Authority,” the May 5 filing stated.

Hendrix was the same judge who, back on March 31, 2022, dismissed the NHBPA's underlying lawsuit. The NHBPA plaintiffs appealed that decision, leading to the Fifth Circuit's reversal on Nov. 18, 2022. But the Fifth Circuit remanded the case back to the Lubbock Division for “further proceedings consistent with” the Appeals Court's reversal. Hendrix's May 6, 2023, order validated the newer version of HISA that got amended and passed into law back on Dec. 29, 2022.

The post NHBPA Again Goes to Court to Try and Halt May 22 ADMC Launch appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The post NHBPA Again Goes to Court to Try and Halt May 22 ADMC Launch first appeared on Horse Racing Free Tips.