Racing organizations Churchill Downs and NYRA file lawsuit against national regulator over compulsory fees
Lawsuit Accuses Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority of Imposing Illegal Fees
Two prominent horse racing organizations in the United States—Churchill Downs, Inc., and the New York Racing Association (NYRA)—have filed a federal lawsuit against the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority (HISA). The lawsuit alleges that HISA's fee requirements are unlawfully imposed, and the regulatory body threatens to bar the organizations from holding races until they comply.
The complaint contends that HISA's fee structure, based on prize money won, is unjust, as it infringes upon individual states' share of racing participation. Furthermore, the organizations argue that HISA's creation as a national regulator poses a significant threat to states' autonomy over the horse racing industry.
In response to the lawsuit, HISA has remained firm in its mission. In a statement, HISA CEO Lisa Lazarus asserted that Churchill Downs and NYRA have failed to comply with the Assessment Methodology Rule, approved by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). She further stated that the organizations are the only ones subject to this rule that have refused to pay their share of fees.
Lazarus described the Assessment Methodology Rule as instrumental in ensuring HISA is adequately funded to oversee anti-doping and medication control programs and racetrack safety effectively. HISA vowed not to allow selective rule-following by any parties and stressed that every racetrack, including CDI and NYRA, must operate under the same regulatory framework.
Though HISA was established under the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act of 2020, the oversight body's legal status has been a matter of controversy. Several court rulings, most notably by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, have questioned HISA's constitutional authority to impose fees and wield regulatory power over the industry.
In the face of these legal challenges, some racing organizations, like Churchill Downs and NYRA, have resisted HISA's efforts, while others, such as the Texas Racing Commission, have not recognized HISA's authority. Additionally, states like West Virginia and Louisiana continue to operate under their own regulations while waiting for legal disputes to be resolved.
The ongoing controversy and legal battles surrounding HISA fees demonstrate the complexity of regulating the horse racing industry at a national level. As the case proceeds, the validity of HISA's regulatory powers and the legality of its fee imposition will continue to be questioned and debated.
The lawsuit filed by Churchill Downs, Inc., and the New York Racing Association (NYRA) challenges the Horseracing Integrality and Safety Authority's (HISA) imposition of fees, claiming it infringes on individual states' autonomy in the business sector, particularly the horse-racing industry. With the federal lawsuit, these organizations argue against HISA's attempts to regulate their financial aspect, claiming it threatens their sports-related operations.
