Op/Ed Feedback: Why Is Legality Considered Optional?

by Peter Ecabert

Bill Finley, in his Mar. 17 TDN opinion piece on the National HBPA challenging the legality of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act, wrote: “It's hard to imagine that there is one horseman anywhere who cares one bit whether or not HISA is unconstitutional or not.”

To Mr. Finley, it doesn't matter if this legislation, ramrodded through to passage with no Senate Committee discussion or debate as a little-known add-on to December's COVID relief bill, is legal or not. Who cares about the law's legality? he asks. The National HBPA cares.

We believe thousands of horsemen and horsewomen, including HBPA members and those in other racing jurisdictions, care, but many are afraid to say aloud that the emperor has no clothes. If they don't care today, we are confident they will down the road when the harmful consequences of HISA are put into effect.

No reasonable person should take issue with the National HBPA, North America's largest Thoroughbred horsemen's association, doing its due diligence to make sure that any such fundamental change to the running of horse racing has a solid legal foundation. It's the due diligence that should have been done in the first place by the well-funded power-brokers pushing this legislation that raises more questions than answers.

Let's be perfectly clear, the National HBPA is and has remained in favor of uniformity. We demanded safety protocols be the norm, not a half-hearted attempt to service public perception. We have never spoken against USADA (United States Anti-Doping Agency) as a contracted entity to aid in enforcement, and we have never stood in favor of the protection of proven cheaters. To label any horsemen's group with that is misinformed and has no basis in fact. However, we have stood for due process and the protection of horsemen and horsewomen's rights. Rest assured we will continue to call for such protection.

What does it matter if the underpinning of what would oversee medication policy, testing, enforcement and safety measures isn't legal? Here's what: those cheaters Mr. Finley believes that HISA will eliminate will have a get-out-of-jail-free card if the law that set up the process for their sanctions is found to violate the U.S. Constitution.

Mr. Finley writes because no one cares about legality (which is what constitutionality comes down to): “Instead, one is left to connect the dots and after doing so, it wouldn't be hard to reach the conclusion that the only reason to have HISA overturned would be that they prefer the status quo over a new system under the control of USADA.” The fact is, there are no dots here–and that's the problem with HISA. It's illegal and open-ended with more questions than answers.

We believe horse owners and horseplayers likely will be forced, with no say-so, to pick up the cost of HISA's unfunded mandate to create a new bureaucracy.

We also believe thousands of horsemen and horsewomen in the trenches want answers to the many questions before putting their livelihood under control by a group which almost certainly will be indirectly selected by and unduly influenced by the elites (i.e., The Jockey Club, whose largely homogeneous membership of approximately 150 is by invitation only).

For those wanting to portray the National HBPA as being obstructionists for demanding due diligence rather than blind faith, we in turn ask: is it really clear how HISA provides integrity, other than establishing an authority with a vague mission and unchecked power? It's like people are reading the bill title, thinking that's all this is to it and all problems are solved.

The National HBPA along with the Liberty Justice Center went beyond the good-feeling title and read the fine print. That's why we're in court.

Peter Ecabert is General Counsel for the National HBPA and owner of Ecabert Law Offices in Lexington, Ky.

The post Op/Ed Feedback: Why Is Legality Considered Optional? appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

NTRA: ‘Contrary To HBPA’s Hyperbole, HISA Is Neither Unprecedented Nor Unconstitutional’

Following Monday's announcement that the National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association (NHBPA) is filing a lawsuit against the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA), the National Thoroughbred Racing Association (NTRA) issued the following response:

Contrary to HBPA's hyperbole, HISA is neither unprecedented nor unconstitutional. HISA emulates the long-established FINRA/SEC model, with even greater protections for all stakeholders. It is disappointing that the HBPA—an entity whose mission is supposedly the welfare of horses and horsemen—would seek to undo much needed reforms to protect the industry's participants.

“HISA, a well-crafted and comprehensive piece of legislation, creates the national framework that addresses our industry's critical need for consistent, forceful anti-doping control and equine safety standards,” said Alex Waldrop, President and CEO of the NTRA. “The NTRA Board of Directors, which consists of representatives from tens of thousands of breeders, owners and trainers from more than 40 states, as well as thousands of horseplayers and virtually every major racetrack in the United States, voted to support HISA. We plan to work tirelessly on behalf of our members and a broad array of interested parties and stakeholders to support HISA's successful launch in July 2022.”

In 2020, the U.S. Congress overwhelmingly passed, and the President signed into law, the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA). Through this landmark legislation, HISA recognizes and empowers the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority (Authority) to protect the safety and welfare of Thoroughbred horseracing's most important participants—its horses—by delivering commonsense medication reforms and track safety standards.

The NHBPA, along with several of its state affiliates, seeks to upend this historic and bipartisan effort to protect Thoroughbred horses and ensure the integrity of horseracing. The HBPA has recently filed a baseless lawsuit in federal court in Texas, seeking to declare HISA unconstitutional on its face. Setting aside its fatal threshold deficiencies—including the lack of any concrete or imminent harm—the HBPA's lawsuit is meritless. HISA is constitutionally and legally sound. On behalf of a broad spectrum of organizations underlying the sport of Thoroughbred horseracing, we offer the following responses to the various claims by HBPA.

1. HBPA Claim: HISA violates the constitutional “non-delegation doctrine.”

Reality: HISA does not violate the non-delegation doctrine because the United States Supreme Court has long recognized that Congress may rely on private entities so long as the government retains ultimate decision-making authority as to rules and enforcement. HISA recognizes and empowers the Authority to propose and enforce uniform national anti-doping and equine safety standards, but only upon review, approval and adoption by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Though this is a first for the Thoroughbred horseracing industry, HISA's structure is not new. HISA follows the FINRA/SEC model of regulation in the securities industry, and, like that model, is constitutional because any action the Authority undertakes is subject to the FTC's approval and oversight.

2. HBPA Claim: The HISA runs afoul of the Appointments Clause.

Reality: The Authority is a private entity, independently established under state law, and recognized by HISA. As such, it is simply not subject to constitutional restraints on appointments (or removal) of its Board members. Indeed, any such claim is at war with HBPA's non-delegation theory premised on the fact that the Authority is a private entity. On the one hand, the HBPA claims that the Authority cannot take action because it is private entity, but then argues, on the other hand, that the Authority cannot appoint its own Board members because it is effectively a public entity. These two HBPA arguments are in conflict, but have one important thing in common: they are both wrong.

3. HBPA Claim: HISA violates due process protections.

Reality: The HBPA's due process theory also falls flat. Though the HBPA complains of equine industry participants regulating their competitors, a strong bipartisan majority of the House and the Senate made clear in HISA that a majority of the Authority's Board members must be from outside the equine industry. To be sure, a minority of the Authority's Board members will have industry experience and engagement. But it is difficult to understand how that statutory recognition of the value of informed voices constitutes a deprivation of due process. What's more, with respect to the minority industry Board members, HISA expressly provides for equal representation among each of the six equine constituencies (trainers, owners and breeders, tracks, veterinarians, state racing commissions, and jockeys). Furthermore, the committee tasked with nominating eligible candidates for Board and standing-committee positions is made up of entirely non-industry members. HISA further imposes broad conflicts-of-interest requirements to ensure that all of its Board members (industry and non-industry alike) as well as non-industry standing committee members (not to mention their employees and family members) are required to remain free of all equine economic conflicts of interest.

Beyond these robust safeguards, established precedent confirms what common sense indicates: even when a private entity is engaged in the regulatory process, agency authority and surveillance protect against promotion of self-interest. Under HISA, for example, the FTC has the authority to decline the Authority's proposed rules and overrule any sanctions—ensuring that neither the Authority nor the individuals making up its Board can use their position for their own advantage in violation of constitutional restraints.

HISA has broad support from the Thoroughbred industry, including: organizations such as the Breeders' Cup, National Thoroughbred Racing Association, The Jockey Club, The Jockeys' Guild, American Association of Equine Practitioners and the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders' Association; the nation's leading racetracks, including Churchill Downs, Del Mar Thoroughbred Club, Gulfstream Park, Keeneland, The Maryland Jockey Club, Monmouth Park, The New York Racing Association and Santa Anita; leading horsemen's organizations such as the Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association and the Thoroughbred Owners of California; prominent Thoroughbred owners Barbara Banke, Anthony Beck, Arthur and Staci Hancock, Fred Hertrich, Barry Irwin, Stuart S. Janney III, Rosendo Parra and Vinnie Viola; leading Thoroughbred trainers Christophe Clement, Neil Drysdale, Janet Elliot, Claude “Shug” McGaughey, Bill Mott, Todd Pletcher and Nick Zito; grassroots organization Water Hay Oats Alliance, with more than 2,000 individual members; international organizations the International Federation of Horseracing Authorities and The Jockey Club of Canada; and prominent animal welfare organizations American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Animal Wellness Action and the Humane Society of the United States.

The post NTRA: ‘Contrary To HBPA’s Hyperbole, HISA Is Neither Unprecedented Nor Unconstitutional’ appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Horsemen’s Groups File Federal Lawsuit Over HISA

Organizations representing some Thoroughbred horse owners and trainers have filed a federal lawsuit to stop the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA), signed into law in the U.S. Congress's December omnibus spending bill.

The National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association (National HBPA) and state affiliates in Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Illinois, Louisiana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington and West Virginia are suing HISA's newly-created “Authority” to regulate the sport and the Federal Trade Commissioners. In addition, they are suing the Nominating Committee and asking the court to immediately stop them from appointing the Board members of the Authority.

They are represented by attorneys at the Liberty Justice Center, which is contending that HISA is unconstitutional because it gives powers to private individuals and a private organization in an area where only a government entity should be allowed such powers.

Notably absent from the list are horsemen's groups representing owners and trainers in the four leading racing states, New York, Kentucky, Florida and California. The New York Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association has come out in favor of HISA.

The news of the lawsuit brought an immediate and strong response from those who have been working behind the scenes for the passage of HISA, which some believe is a necessary step in order for the sport to clean itself up and prevent cheating and the use of performance-enhancing drugs.

“If they are successful and they stop this, you can kiss the horse industry goodbye,” said breeder and owner Arthur Hancock. “Look at what has happened in the past. That so many have come together to try to clean up the sport is a wonderful thing. Everyone wants a level playing field and this will give it to them. I don't know why anyone would object to that.”

“This is ridiculous,” said Hall of Fame trainer Mark Casse. “I read this and thought, 'you've got to be kidding me.' All we are trying to do is clean up our sport. Looking at the states where they are backing this, those are some of the states that most need cleaning up. I don't know how anybody could be against cleaning up our sport. I can tell you one thing, they never asked me for my opinion.”

While it remains to be seen whether or not the lawsuit succeeds in circumventing HISA, it could cause delays. The United States Anti-Doping Agency is set to begin policing the sport and testing its participants on July 1, 2022. That date could now be in jeopardy.

According to its website, The Liberty Justice Center is “a non-profit conservative public-interest litigation center that fights to protect economic liberty, private property rights, free speech, and other fundamental rights in Illinois and beyond.” According to Wikipedia, The Liberty Justice Center is an associate member of the State Policy Network, a web of state pressure groups that denote themselves as “think tanks” and drive a right-wing agenda in statehouses nationwide.

“All Americans should be concerned when Congress gives power to regulate an entire industry to a private group of industry insiders,” said Brian Kelsey, senior attorney at the Liberty Justice Center, in a statement. “This goes way beyond setting rules for the sport of horse racing. This is not the NBA or the NFL. The 'Authority' has the power to make laws, issue subpoenas and effectively tax owners with little real oversight. Placing that power in a private organization is illegal and must be stopped.”

The Jockey Club, the main proponent of HISA, also issued a statement Monday.

“We are not at all surprised by the lawsuit filed against HISA today by a number of affiliates of the National HPBA,” it read. “We are confident that the law is constitutionally sound and legal, as it is patterned precisely after other longstanding law. It's a shame that the National HPBA has chosen this expensive and time-consuming path, but it is consistent with their well known pattern of conduct that has served to block or water down needed reforms that the vast majority of the equine industry and animal welfare organizations support. It is worth noting that this suit is also brought by state HBPA affiliates that are the greatest beneficiaries of the earlier federal legislation, the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978, which confers upon them virtually unlimited authority over interstate wagering on Thoroughbred races.”

Jeff Gural, who owns the Meadowlands and has been one of the leading voices calling for harness and Thoroughbred racing to undergo sweeping changes when it comes to integrity issues, said he does not believe the lawsuit will ultimately stop HISA.

“I think it will prevail,” he said. “I don't think they have a chance because Judges will look at this and, instinctively, will want to keep the horses from being drugged. Them going in and saying drugging horses is OK is going to be tough to sell, especially after all those people were indicted. I'm not too concerned.”

The lawsuit was filed on Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

The post Horsemen’s Groups File Federal Lawsuit Over HISA appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Harness Horsemen Sign Letter Support Horseracing Integrity & Safety Act

Leaders in the harness racing industry have signed a letter supporting the Horseracing Integrity & Safety Act, which was signed into law on Dec. 27, 2020. Meanwhile, the United States Trotting Association has confirmed its opposition to the new law.

The horsemen's letter, first published at Harness Racing Update, reads:

The undersigned are encouraging the Standardbred industry about how best to structure the Horseracing Integrity & Safety Act to be inclusive of Harness Racing's unique needs.

We support the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act recently passed by Congress and signed into law by President Trump.

We know that there are details about funding and other matters that will have to be worked out in good faith between regulators and members of the horse racing community. And we know that the new law is not perfect. But we believe that the new law is a legitimate and important step in the right direction toward universal medication rules for our sport, increased enforcement of drug rules to make the sport more honest, and a greater public acceptance of horse racing as a safe, humane sport.

We need all of these things to protect our sport's future. And we need to work within the broader racing community to make the law work for us, especially since it requires regulators to consider the “unique characteristics” of each breed. We believe that representatives of the Standardbred industry should work with those who support the new law, and who will be enforcing it, to help establish the rules and policies that will likely govern our sport for years to come.

Signed,

Breeders

Adam Bowden (Diamond Creek); Bruce Trogden (Emerald Highlands); Steve Jones (Cameo Hills); George Segal (Brittany); Mike Gulotta (Deo Volente); Senena & Jeff Esty (Spring Haven); Frank Antonacci (Lindy); Bob Brady (Kentuckiana); Al & Michelle Crawford (Crawford Farms); Ken Jackson (Kentuckiana); Mario Zuanetti (Atlantic Trot); Massimo Bianchi; Margareta W. Kleberg (Menhammer St); Tom Hill; Art Zubrod (Brittany); Jim & Gibson Wilhite; Knutsson Trotting; Tristan Sjoberg; Bernie Noren; Al Libfeld; Sam Goldband; Charles & Julie Nash; Jon Wiesman; Pond A Acres; Andrew Cohen (Bays Stable); Leah Cheverie; David Heffering (Tara Hills); Frank Lomangino; Johan Arneng (Brixton Medical); John Donato; Ernny Gerbaulet; Richard Gutnick; Peter Martinson; Robert Mondillo; Victor Zehr; Ed Telle; James Daut; Robert Hechoff; Richard Arnold (Willow Oak); John Schmucker (Black Creek); Dan Baer (South Mountain); John Lengacher; John Bootsman (Boko); Dan Lengacher; Duncan Taylor (Taylor Made); Jeff Ruch (Pinestone); Anders Strom (Courant); Maumee River; Jeff Gural (Allerage); All American Harnessbreds; Mike Andrew; Maurizio & Marina Biasuzzi; John Carver; Joe Mendelson; Jim Glass (Walco); Stephanie Rothaug (Rails End); Jim Avritt Sr (Meadow Creek); Stewart Goldberg (Mini Sinks); Randy & Kim Haines (Cool Winds); Steve & Cindy Stewart (Hunterton); Elmer Miller; Lorne Polger (Polger Holdings)

Trainers and Drivers

Ron Burke; Brian Brown; Virgil Morgan Jr.; Jimmy Takter (Hall Of Fame); Ben Wallace; Casie Coleman; Nifty Norman; Jeff Fout; Ed Lohmeyer; Linda Toscano (Hall Of Fame); Paula Wellwood; Mike Keeling; Jim Campbell; Carter Pinske; Tony Alagna; Donna Lee Ozment; Joe Holloway (Hall Of Fame); Per Engblom; Tom Cancelliere; Enos Weaver; Donald Dancer; Blair Burgess (Hall Of Fame); Brad Mcninch; Kevin Mcdermott; Jean Wellwood; Bob Stewart; Murray Brethour; Jim Arledge; Greg Peck; Kelly O'Donnell; Tim Lane; Scott Mogan; Brett Bittle; Scott Zeron

Owners

Mark Weaver; Howard Taylor; Herb Liverman; John Fodera; Murray Brown; Brad Grant; Fred Hertrick III; Carl Howard; Martin Sternberg; Bo Lofvander; Doug Millard; Ernie Gaskin; Robert Burgess; Fred Hudson; Bryan Montgomery (Regency Ins.); Frank Chick; Myron & Stephanie Bell (Riverview); Harvey Nagner (Radio Racing); Marc Guilfoil (Ky. Racing Comm.); Richard Young; Martti Ala Seppala; Harvey Fried; Robert Lindstrom; Perry Soderberg; Tommy B Anderson; Jack Remey ( P. Judge); Lynn Jones; Randy Manges; Bob Marks; Joyce & Richard Mcclelland; Bill Vit (Cool Cat); Craig Henderson; Ray Baynes; Gary Corona; Allan Schott; Howard Perlmutter; Gorden Banks; Dan Kazmaier (P. Judge); Bob & Jeanne Stewart; Mark Hanover; Ed Biddle; Kimmo Kempi; Nick Salvi; Mike & Don Robinson; Joe Sbrocco; Virginia Berkner; Steven Wienick; Martha Frank; Robert Leblanc; John Balzer; Geoffrey Dubrowsky; Bill Reepmayer; Frank Cannon; Jason Settlemoir

Vets

Dr. Patty Hogan; Dr. Terry Ruch; Dr. Doug Hutchins; Dr. John Park; Dr. Lynda Rhodes Stewart; Dr. Nathaniel Newton; Dr. Ted Mazorisi

The post Harness Horsemen Sign Letter Support Horseracing Integrity & Safety Act appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights