The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing a series of challenges involving the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority (HISA), a private regulatory body established by the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act of 2020. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that the act is unconstitutional, marking the latest development in a long-standing legal dispute over federal oversight of the horse racing industry.
The 5th Circuit’s Ruling on HISA
On November 14, 2024, a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declared the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act unconstitutional. In the opinion for National Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association v. Black, Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan argued that the law improperly delegated federal enforcement power to a private entity.
The court contended that the HISA’s structure, which grants the Authority power to create and enforce safety rules subject to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) oversight, provides the private body with excessive discretion. This decision follows a history of litigation regarding the act, which Congress amended in 2022 to clarify the FTC’s ultimate authority over the HISA in an attempt to address previous constitutional concerns.
Conflict with Supreme Court Precedent
The 5th Circuit’s ruling stands in contrast to the Supreme Court’s recent decision in FCC v. Consumers’ Research. In that case, the Supreme Court held that Congress may delegate authority to a private entity provided that the entity functions subordinately to a federal agency that retains final decision-making power.
While the 5th Circuit maintained that the HISA structure does not meet this standard, other federal appellate courts have reached different conclusions. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a decision authored by Chief Judge Jeffrey Sutton, upheld the constitutionality of the act. The 6th Circuit reasoned that because the FTC maintains the power to review, approve, or reject safety rules and investigation protocols, the HISA operates under sufficient federal oversight. The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has also previously upheld the act’s framework.
Why the Legal Disagreement Matters
The disagreement between the 5th Circuit and other appellate courts creates significant regulatory uncertainty for the horse racing industry.
- Regulatory Consistency: The 2020 act was designed to replace a fragmented, state-by-state regulatory system with uniform national standards for safety and anti-doping.
- Judicial Reversals: The Supreme Court has frequently reversed decisions from the 5th Circuit in recent terms. According to data from the Supreme Court’s 2023-2024 term, the 5th Circuit faced a high volume of cases taken up by the justices, with a significant majority resulting in reversals.
- Administrative Authority: The dispute centers on the "private nondelegation doctrine," a constitutional principle that limits how much legal authority Congress can grant to non-governmental organizations.
What Happens Next
The government is expected to seek further emergency relief from the Supreme Court to prevent the 5th Circuit’s ruling from immediately nullifying federal horse racing regulations. Given the Supreme Court’s prior intervention in this litigation and its recent ruling in Consumers’ Research, legal analysts anticipate that the high court will likely revisit the issue to resolve the circuit split and provide finality regarding the HISA’s status. Until the Supreme Court issues a definitive ruling, the enforcement of national safety standards in horse racing remains subject to ongoing legal challenges.