Supreme Court supports enforcement of law to clean up horse racing industry

CNN
—

The Supreme Court on Monday allowed an independent body to enforce the federal anti-doping law for the horse racing industry, which was passed in the wake of a string of fatalities in thoroughbred horses, and hinted at a larger power-sharing fight galloping toward referees in the coming weeks.

Court one paragraph order left the enforcement mechanism in place while judges look at a series of appeals that raise more fundamental questions.

Congress passed the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act in 2020 in the wake of several highly publicized thoroughbred horse fatalities and corruption scandals. Among other things, the act created the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority, a private law enforcement entity under the supervision of the Federal Trade Commission.

Groups defending the law told the Supreme Court that in 2019 alone, 441 thoroughbred horses died from racial injuries, a much higher rate than in other countries. Because of these deaths, the industry has faced safety questions internally and from animal rights organizations across the United States in recent years.

A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld most of the law but weakened the authority’s enforcement powers, writing that the law allows a private entity to “issue subpoenas, conduct searches and impose monetary penalties” without FTC approval . “This,” the appeals court ruled, “is prohibited by the Constitution.”

So while Monday’s order was limited to the horse racing industry, the Supreme Court’s decision on the merits could have had much broader implications if it answered the question of when federal agencies can delegate authority to private entities.

There are already several appeals pending before the Supreme Court, including one over horses and another by the Biden administration over the Universal Service Fund, the multibillion-dollar pool of money that Americans pay for their telephone bills. The issue is whether the Federal Communications Commission can “delegate” the collection of this fee to the private entity that manages the fund.

Both sides agree that the court should take up the case, which makes it a likely candidate for consideration as soon as early next year.

“Intervening in a relatively smaller horse racing case seems to be a pretty clear signal that the court intends to take up some or all of the larger cases as well — and probably sooner rather than later,” said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University Law Center Georgetown.

If that happens, it will be the last instance of the Supreme Court weighing administrative law in a way that could significantly weaken federal agencies. Just a few months ago, the court overturned a precedent requiring the use of lower courts show respect for federal agencies when interpreting unclear regulations – an outcome that has already inspired a flood of challenges to other federal laws.

President Donald Trump signed the horse racing industry bill into law in 2020, and it had bipartisan support. The law is being challenged by the National Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association, which represents horse owners and breeders.

Throughout its long history, the industry has been marked by several doping scandals. Perhaps the loudest allegations in recent years concern American coach Bob Baffert. The legendary trainer was disqualified after his horse, Medina Spirit, failed a drug test after initially winning the 2021 Kentucky Derby.

At the time, Baffert said, the drug was in the form of a topical ointment to treat skin infections, and Medina Spirit had not yet been injected.

He later said he was responsible for any substances found in his trained horses and “paid a very high price” with Medina Spirit’s disqualification and three-year suspension from Churchill Downs. Baffert has since been reinstated.

Additionally, in 2020, more than two dozen people associated with the industry were indicted for their involvement in a scheme to give horses performance-enhancing drugs to help them win races around the world.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a member of the court’s liberal wing, on Monday dissented from the court’s decision on a technicality, saying there was no need for the Supreme Court to step into the emergency case because the same issues were pending on the merits of the case.