Court Takes No Immediate Action in New HISA Suit

EDITOR'S NOTE: Following the initial publication of this story, at the request of the plaintiffs, a hastily-arranged telephone status conference with the court and attorneys for both sides of the case was held in the late afternoon June 30. Plaintiffs' attorneys asked Judge Terry A. Doughty to immediately sign a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. Doughty declined, writing "that issuing a temporary restraining order regarding an Act of Congress would be inappropriate. Accordingly, it is ordered that the motion for temporary restraining order filed by plaintiffs is denied."

**********

A federal lawsuit filed June 29 against the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority requesting a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against the implementation of HISA will not receive an immediate decision from the court. HISA's enabling legislation calls for it to go into effect July 1.

In addition to HISA, its executive director Lisa Lazarus, the Federal Trade Commission, and several other individuals are named as defendants. The suit was filed by the states of Louisiana and West Virginia, their respective racing commissions, the Louisiana Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association, the Louisiana Thoroughbred Breeders Association, the Jockeys' Guild, and several individuals who allegedly will be personally affected by HISA. 

The National HBPA is not a plaintiff, but on the day after the suit was filed, National HBPA president and board chairman Doug Daniels said, "We applaud Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry and the other plaintiffs who are demanding answers for everyone in the industry.”

A "minute order" signed June 30 by Doughty implicitly declined to make an immediate ruling on plaintiffs' motions by granting the defendants until July 14 to respond. Plaintiffs are given seven days after a response is filed to reply. There is no indication in the court record whether an oral argument will be scheduled.

Plaintiffs' motions are accompanied by an underlying 56-page complaint. The complaint alleges multiple violations of the federal Administrative Procedures Act; violations of search-and-seizure protections granted by the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; abridgment of the right to jury trial in suits at common law guaranteed by the Seventh Amendment; a declaration that rules adopted by the FTC exceed its statutory authority; and a declaration setting aside HISA rules.

At the conclusion of the motions for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction is what in legal circles is called a prayer for relief. It asks the court to order the defendants "to disregard HISA rules and to execute the statutory duties of their offices ... as if the HISA rules did not exist (and) to temporarily restrain and preliminarily enjoin defendants from implementing HISA rules."

The case, filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, seeks a national preliminary injunction. A 46-page memorandum of law concludes by noting that "this court should grant plaintiff's motion and enjoin defendants from wreaking havoc on the horseracing industry across the nation."

Although the suit seeks to enjoin a regulatory scheme set to go into effect two days later, the documents forming the basis of the plaintiffs' case were not thrown together at the last minute. The memorandum of law cites 39 mostly federal court decisions and has references to 32 sections of federal, Louisiana, and West Virginia statutory law, and the Federal Register.

A suit challenging HISA filed by the national HBPA and affiliates in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in March 2021 was dismissed earlier this year and is under appeal. Louisiana and Texas are both overseen by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. A similar case brought by the State of Oklahoma and others in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky was also dismissed and appears to be on appeal to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.