Keeping Pace: Supreme Court Won't Hear Key Challenge To HISA
The United States Supreme Court on Monday announced that it would not review a decision by the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that found the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act is a constitutional exercise of Congressional power and authority. The justices did not specifically rule in favor of HISA. But their decision not to hear an appeal in the case styled Oklahoma v. United States is a strong signal that they are comfortable with the lower courts’ decision in favor of the new racing law. It’s also a strong signal that a majority on the court saw nothing meritorious enough in the anti-HISA arguments to justify a substantive review of the case.
The denial of a writ of certiorari, as it is called, is a major blow to the anti-HISA faction within Thoroughbred and Standardbred racing. That includes the states of Oklahoma, West Virginia and Louisiana, racing commissions in Oklahoma and West Virginia, and also the United States Trotting Association, which is led by President Russell Williams, whose Hanover Shoe Farms is also a losing plaintiff in the case. Millions of dollars were spent on attorneys’ fees and costs by these parties and others to block HISA. Hundreds of thousands of words of legalese were filed. But a loser case is a loser case, no matter how smart the lawyers are (or are not).
Charles Scheeler, who chairs the HISA Board of Directors, issued this statement: "We are pleased the Supreme Court has decided to let the Sixth Circuit Court’s ruling affirming HISA’s constitutionality stand. As evidenced by the 38 percent decline in equine fatalities recorded for the first quarter of this year, HISA’s uniform standards are having a material, positive impact on the health and well-being of horses. It is long past time for opponents of HISA to drop their outstanding lawsuits. In light of this decision, continued litigation only serves to take time and valuable resources away from our core mission of improving the safety and integrity of Thoroughbred racing."
The immediate legal impact of the Supreme Court’s action today is unclear. Because the Sixth Circuit had upheld HISA, the federal law is already in operation in the states within that circuit’s jurisdiction. Nothing changes. And because the justices in Washington did not offer a substantive ruling on the law, the states where HISA has been put on hold because of pending constitutional challenges won’t automatically have to embrace HISA. So nothing changes there, either. But there is no doubt that this Sixth Circuit case represented the best chance for anti-HISA forces to get a win at the Supreme Court. And there is no reason why HISA officials cannot cite this Supreme Court action every time an industry opponent now tries to claim the law is invalid.
Not only does the Supreme Court’s choice not to hear the Sixth Circuit appeal effectively end that case, it also raises great doubt about whether a similar challenge, now pending before the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, can survive. A ruling in the Fifth Circuit case has been pending now for over six months but what do you think the judges will do now that they know what the Supreme Court thinks of HISA challenges? Will they strike down HISA anyway? Or will they choose the path of lesser resistance and issue a ruling that confirms the constitutionality of the law along the lines of what the Sixth Circuit did last year? My guess is that latter – and that the Fifth Circuit judges have been waiting all along for such a signal from the Supreme Court.
The same is true of a challenge to HISA now pending in the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over states like Arkansas, Iowa, and Minnesota. Earlier this month, a panel of Eighth Circuit judges heard oral argument over whether there should be a federal injunction banning enforcement of HISA. How do you think that panel is going to react now that it knows the Supreme Court isn’t interested in rescuing lawsuits against the federal racing law. I don’t think we are going to have to wait more than six months for the Eighth Circuit to toss out that challenge to HISA, either.
There is another layer to this development. The arguments against HISA were brought by states run by Republican attorneys general who joined with anti-HISA groups to argue that the new federal law was some illegal private endeavor foisted upon the industry by a Congress which had over-delegated its authority. This is essentially an argument favored by some conservative judges and lawyers but it found no support from conservative judges like Jeffrey Sutton, a well-respected Republican nominee (and chief judge) on the Sixth Circuit who ruled in favor of HISA last year in a decision that started with the words: “Sometimes government works.”
(article continues below)
United States Supreme Court in Washington, D.C.
©Jeffrey/Adobe Stock photo
Recommended for You
The bottom line is that the Supreme Court recognized what the Sixth Circuit recognized and what the great body of legal precedent recognizes: Congress properly delegated its authority and power here to the Federal Trade Commission, the agency which oversees the HISA Authority and all that stems from it. A longshot legal argument by anti-HISA forces, an argument that sought to take advantage of anti-government sentiments, failed because Congress subsequently “fixed” HISA to address one of the most significant concerns and because Congress is allowed to use federal agencies to regulate some industries.
Tom Rooney, President and CEO of the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, applauded the news.
"Today’s Supreme Court ruling affirming the constitutionality of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) represents a significant step forward in ensuring the safety and integrity of Thoroughbred racing," Rooney said in a statement. "This decision will allow HISA to continue its work to protect the health and safety of equine athletes, thereby fostering greater confidence and integrity in the sport of Thoroughbred racing. The impact of HISA's regulations is already evident. During the first quarter of 2024, racetracks operating under HISA reported a substantial 38% reduction year over year in racing-related equine fatalities. These positive improvements demonstrate the efficacy of HISA's centralized approach in enhancing the welfare of racehorses and promoting a safer racing environment.
"It is time for all parties to stop their internal fighting and support HISA as the law of the land," Rooney said.
The justices in Washington, D.C., have signaled the beginning of the end to these sorts of constitutional challenges to HISA. There will still be legal challenges to the federal law as it is applied, however, and some of these challenges are likely to be valid. But both the Thoroughbred and Standardbred industries should now begin to focus less on whether HISA should be the law of the land and more on how to make the federal law better and, in doing so, making horse racing safer and less susceptible to doping and other forms of cheating. Today is a big day – a great day– for anyone who supports more integrity in racing.
Sign up for our newsletters to get alerts for Keeping Pace and other Paulick Report features and our must-read Daily Headlines.
Want to support more transparency and accountability in horse racing? Consider becoming a sponsor of this column. Contact us at advertise@paulickreport.com
