In Odd Legal Twist, NHPBA Criticizes Decision To Delay ADMC

Even as the National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association (NHBPA) is trying to halt the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) for good, its attorneys filed a response in federal court Thursday that criticized the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)'s Apr. 27 order that mandated the third delay in nearly a year for the implementation of the Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) program, this time from May 1 to May 22.

The NHBPA told the court that the FTC's issuance of the order to delay the program without first providing a 30-day public comment period on the date switch goes against the provisions set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which governs the process by which federal agencies develop and issue regulations.

The NHBPA also stated that the FTC's decision to delay the ADMC program is “totally inconsistent” with the FTC and HISA Authority's previous arguments that the program needed to be implemented as swiftly and as uniformly as possible.

The NHBPA filing also pointed out that although the FTC cited a desire not to cause “confusion” by implementing the ADMC on May 1, five days before the Triple Crown series starts with the May 6 GI Kentucky Derby, the FTC's decision to go with a May 22 start date instead puts the new effective date right in the midst of that series, after the May 20 GI Preakness S. but before the June 10 GI Belmont S.

“The Horsemen will not challenge the Order as lacking good cause because they believe any delay is good for their members, their horses, and their industry-they are seeking a permanent delay in the rule, after all. But they cannot help but note that for a second time in as many months the FTC and Authority have steamrolled over the fundamental principles of notice-and-comment at the heart of the APA,” stated the NHBPA's filing in United States District Court (Northern District of Texas, Lubbock Division).

“The FTC says its order does not need a period of public comment because it has 'good cause' to issue the rule immediately,” the NHBPA filing stated, quoting portions from the FTC order. “'Good cause' is an 'emergency power,' normally reserved for dire circumstances where life and limb are in danger. The mere existence of a statutory deadline doesn't cut it…. The Authority has represented that immediate implementation of the rule is necessary to preserve life and limb; it is hard now to understand how the FTC can find good cause to delay the rule if that's the legal standard. The policy rationale the Order gives is at best thin gruel.”

The FTC's “notice of delay” filed with the same court, also on Thursday, stated that, “Because the ADMC Rule governs the treatment of horses weeks before a covered race, some affected parties who are treating horses in a manner consistent with state requirements may find it difficult to come into compliance in the five days between the ADMC Rule's scheduled effective date and the Kentucky Derby on May 6. Even in the absence of conflicts between the ADMC Rule and applicable state regulations, implementing new testing requirements just days before the start of the Triple Crown creates an appreciable risk of errors, confusion, and inconsistent treatment of similarly situated horses-harms that could frustrate the purposes of the Act.”

The FTC stated that the HISA statute “authorizes the [FTC] to abrogate, add to, or modify the Authority's rules for specified reasons, including 'to ensure the fair administration of the Authority,' [and that while the] APA typically provides for notice-and-comment rulemaking, [that comment period is] not required with respect to a rulemaking when an 'agency for good cause finds…that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.”

The FTC's filing continued: “Here, the [FTC] finds, for good cause, that notice and comment is impracticable and unnecessary with respect to the final rule. Given the short time remaining before commencement of the Triple Crown races, providing advance notice would delay the effect of the final rule until after the Kentucky Derby, defeating the rule's purpose. Obtaining comments after issuance of the rule is unnecessary because the full effect of the Commission's rule-which merely provides for a brief delay in the effective date of the ADMC Rule-will have occurred prior to the Commission's collection and consideration of any comments.”

The NHBPA countered with this explanation in its filing: “As the FTC has reminded us in the past, “[t]he bedrock principle of the Act is the need for uniformity.' [But now] the rules for the three Triple Crown races will not be uniform, because the Defendants have chosen May 22 rather than June 12 as the start date for the ADMC. As a result, the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness will be governed by state law, while the Belmont will be governed by the ADMC (unless it is enjoined or delayed again)…

“Now the FTC is saying that the Authority is not ready to roll?” the NHBPA filing asked rhetorically. “In Kentucky, home state of the Kentucky Derby, where a voluntary state implementation agreement with the Authority and the state racing commission was signed March 21, 2023? Again, if this were before the Court as an APA challenge, would this fly?

“Again, the Horsemen are not going to file an as-applied APA challenge that the Order is inconsistent with the Act's insistence on uniformity, because they believe the delay is good for the Horsemen and the industry,” the NHBPA filing stated. “But they must point out the absolute lack of respect for the Act and their own professed priority shown by Defendants.”

The ADMC program had originally been expected to go into effect July 1, 2022, according to its enabling law. That start date then got pushed back to Jan. 1, 2023. In mid-December 2002, that date got scrapped when the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) declined to approve the rules that would make the program operational by the start of 2023, citing legal issues.

The HISA Authority then ramped up for an expected Mar. 27 start date after receiving FTC clearance. The ADMC went briefly into effect for four days, but on Mar. 31, the federal judge handling this lawsuit issued a 30-day injunction that suspended the program, pushing the ADMC start date out to May 1.

TDN first reported on Apr. 25 that the ADMC's May 1 start date was in jeopardy after hearing testimony about it during Tuesday's Pennsylvania Horse Racing Commission meeting, when an official with that agency stated he had been contacted by HISA Authority officials on Apr. 21, informing him that the new start date was May 22.

The HISA Authority did not initially respond to an Apr. 25 request for confirmation from TDN on the date switch, but the FTC court filing and a subsequent press release on Thursday verified the change, citing a vote taken by FTC commissioners.

The NHBPA also took umbrage with the way that FTC order came about.

“One scratches one's head how it is that the FTC announced this order to the public [on] Apr. 27, but Authority staff was calling state commissions on Apr. 21 telling them that it was being delayed to May 22,” the NHBPA filing stated. “At best, the FTC gave the Authority a heads-up that it was making this delay decision. Much more likely, this was the Authority's decision all along, and the FTC ratified it because the FTC ratifies everything asked of it by the Authority…”

The post In Odd Legal Twist, NHPBA Criticizes Decision To Delay ADMC appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Judge Orders Gulf Coast vs. HISA Case Transferred To Same Division As NHBPA Suit

An Amarillo Division federal judge in Texas on Thursday ordered the most recently filed lawsuit out of four active nationwide cases all trying to overturn the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) to be transferred to the Lubbock Division that is currently handling the National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association (NHBPA)'s similar and recently remanded complaint.

The Apr. 6 order by U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk (Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division) comes more than eight months after the litigation was initiated on July 29, 2022, and just one day after the plaintiffs in the Amarillo case asked for a temporary restraining order and motion for preliminary injunction to halt the enforcement of HISA.

The plaintiffs in the case are Global Gaming LSP, a limited liability company that owns Lone Star Park; Gulf Coast Racing LLC, the owner of a greyhound track that no longer conducts live racing in Nueces County, and both LRP Group Ltd. and Valle De Los Tesoros, which are two limited partnerships separately looking to operate new horse tracks in south Texas.

The defendants are the HISA Authority and the Federal Trade Commission.

“Here, Plaintiffs have asked for extraordinary relief in asking for a TRO and a preliminary injunction,” the judge wrote. “Aside from the merits, at issue in the TRO is whether [the] NHBPA [case's 30-day injunction out of the Lubbock Division] remains binding on Defendants.”

The judge outlined the chronology of the two cases that led to his decision.

“In November 2022 the Fifth Circuit held that HISA violated the private nondelegation doctrine [in the NHBPA appeal]. On Dec. 23, 2022, Congress enacted legislation amending the operative language of HISA to purportedly cure the constitutional defect. The amendment was signed into law by President Biden on Dec. 29. Defendants then filed a motion to vacate the Fifth Circuit panel opinion and a petition for panel rehearing. On Jan. 31, 2023, the Fifth Circuit denied Defendants' motions and remanded the case to the Lubbock Division.”

The judge continued: “Because the Fifth Circuit remanded that case back to Lubbock, the Lubbock Division is in the best position to answer these questions. The issues raised by this case and the Lubbock Action substantially overlap. Both cases involve plaintiffs representing the horseracing industry. Both cases involve the same defendants. Both challenge the constitutionality of HISA. The proof adduced to resolve these claims will likely be identical. And the plaintiffs in both cases share the same ultimate objective.

“The Lubbock Action was filed more than a year before this case was filed and the Lubbock Division is much more familiar with the applicable law,” the judge's order continued. “Thus, the principles that underlie the first-to-file rule justify transferring this case to the Lubbock Division.

Quoting from precedents, the judge stated the legal basis for transferring the case.

“Under the first-to-file rule, when related cases are pending before two federal courts, the court in which the case was last filed may refuse to hear it if the issues raised by the cases substantially overlap. The rule rests on principles of comity and sound judicial administration. The concern manifestly is to avoid the waste of duplication, to avoid rulings which may trench upon the authority of sister courts, and to avoid piecemeal resolution of issues that call for a uniform result.”

The post Judge Orders Gulf Coast vs. HISA Case Transferred To Same Division As NHBPA Suit appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Federal Bill To Replace HISA Reportedly In Pipeline

A federal bill aimed at replacing the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) with a regulatory system modeled around an interstate compact is reportedly in the pipeline.

The president of the United States Trotting Association (USTA), Russell Williams, disclosed the news about the pending legislation Mar. 21 during a special meeting of the Pennsylvania Horse Racing Commission (PHRC).

Williams addressed the PHRC Tuesday just prior to the board voting in favor of entering into three nine-month agreements with the HISA Authority that pertain to the Racetrack Safety Program, the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU), and the Laboratory Services Agreement.

Williams was urging the board to consider future implications prior to taking its vote, and one of the issues he brought up was the looming potential for a replacement regulatory structure.

“It's not just a possibility out there. It should be happening in the near future,” Williams said.

“There is legislation about to be introduced in Congress [and] the primary sponsor of this legislation has been talking with us,” Williams said. He did not disclose who that senator or congressman is.

“We provided him with a draft,” Williams continued. “The draft came from the [North American Association of] Racetrack Veterinarians, the HBPA, and the USTA. And it's already been through legislative services, [which has] put it in Congressional format, and as soon as the primary sponsor has his team put together, the bill will be introduced.

“This bill is a state-administered program,” Williams said. “So states would form an interstate compact. They would use state authorities, state experience and state funding, and save millions of dollars over the HISA structure.

“The legislation is health- and safety-focused,” Williams said. “It provides all of the same benefits to the racing industry that HISA does. It is science-based, and this is one of the problems we've had historically with the approach of HISA; it's in the HISA statute, the arbitrary nature of the regulatory approaches in words and statute, the Lasix ban.”

Williams said that the new legislation would be underpinned by “state administration, a science basis for making policy decisions, and a funding model that can be afforded by the racing industry.”

TDN could not independently confirm the involvement of the National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association (NHBPA) with the pending legislation. A phone message left for the NHBPA's chief executive officer, Eric Hamelback, did not yield a return call prior to deadline for this story.

The post Federal Bill To Replace HISA Reportedly In Pipeline appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Fifth Circuit Rules No `Emergency’ Status in States Vs. HISA Case

The United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that it won't treat a request made by the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) Authority to vacate a recent panel opinion and reinstate a stay pending appeal as an “emergency” that requires an expedited decision.

The decision involves a lawsuit under appeal brought by the states of Louisiana and West Virginia, plus other “covered persons” under HISA, alleging unconstitutionality and federal rulemaking procedure violations.

(Note: An earlier version of this story misidentified the plaintiff in the case. The National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association and its affiliates are not party to this decision; they are plaintiffs in a separate lawsuit. TDN regrets the error.)

Instead, the court ruled that the case would proceed under the court's standard timetable, which gives the NHBPA and its 12 affiliates 10 days to file a response to HISA's motion.

“The district court's order preliminarily enjoining enforcement in Louisiana and West Virginia of all then-existing rules promulgated under HISA directly undermines Congress's goal of providing for uniform regulations to protect horseracing participants (equine and human) and restore integrity to the sport nationwide,” the HISA filing from Jan. 3 stated.

“This Court appropriately stayed that order, finding that each of 'the stay elements are met' with respect to the district court's (manifestly flawed) conclusion that the Administrative Procedure Act forecloses the fourteen-day notice period the FTC formally provided…

“The stay pending appeal was necessary to 'allow [the Court] to bring 'considered judgment' to the matter before [it] and 'responsibly fulfill [its] role in the judicial process.' Yet the panel's subsequent decision to remand the case and lift the stay short-circuits that process, not based on the merits of the district court's order-which have never been adjudicated-but on the sole ground that a panel in a 'separate cases held that 'HISA is facially unconstitutional.'”

The HISA filing summed up: “This Court should vacate its panel opinion and judgment, and reinstate the Court's stay pending further adjudication of this appeal…. The Court should grant [a] panel rehearing and reverse the district court's grant of a preliminary injunction.”

The post Fifth Circuit Rules No `Emergency’ Status in States Vs. HISA Case appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights