Churchill Downs and NYRA Sue HISA Over Fee Dispute

Churchill Downs Inc. (CDI), which owns the renowned Kentucky Derby, alongside the New York Racing Association (NYRA), responsible for major New York tracks like Belmont Park and Saratoga Race Course, are launching a legal battle against the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority (HISA). The lawsuit, filed in a Kentucky federal court on December 4th, challenges HISA’s fee assessment practices, which the plaintiffs argue are unconstitutional and mismanaged. At the heart of the dispute are the millions of dollars in fees that HISA claims are owed by CDI and NYRA. According to the plaintiffs, these fees were calculated using a flawed method that combines race starts with prize money or “purses,” an approach they assert violates the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act, which stipulates that fees should strictly be based on race starts.

Established in 2020 to enforce consistent safety and anti-doping regulations in horseracing, HISA has defended its fee assessment system, which received approval from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). HISA maintains that the current method ensures equitable funding necessary for the sustainability of its programs. HISA CEO Lisa Lazarus highlighted that the rules were crafted with extensive input from stakeholders and are crucial for maintaining fairness and

Established in 2020 to enforce consistent safety and anti-doping regulations in horseracing, HISA has defended its fee assessment system, which received approval from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). HISA maintains that the current method ensures equitable funding necessary for the sustainability of its programs. HISA CEO Lisa Lazarus highlighted that the rules were crafted with extensive input from stakeholders and are crucial for maintaining fairness and integrity in the sport. The stakes are high. Should the plaintiffs fail to pay the disputed fees, HISA has warned that it might halt racing activities at their tracks, a move that could significantly disrupt the 2025 racing season at locations like Churchill Downs and Belmont Park.

The contention extends beyond fee calculations, touching on the broader legal authority of HISA. CDI and NYRA accuse HISA of exceeding its jurisdiction by employing its internal processes to enforce penalties, bypassing federal courts. They contend that this practice encroaches upon Article III of the US Constitution, which vests the judiciary with the authority to settle private disputes. Moreover, the lawsuit argues that HISA’s actions breach due process rights and the Administrative Procedure Act, suggesting that the organization operates with considerable power but minimal governmental oversight.

This legal struggle reignites a broader debate about H