By T. D. Thornton
A federal judge on Aug. 1 refused to grant an “emergency” request for a temporary restraining order that eight licensed racetrackers in Oklahoma requested on July 29 to keep the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) from being enforced in that state before the Remington Park meet begins there Aug. 16.
Chief Judge Timothy DeGiusti of United States District Court of Oklahoma (Western District) wrote in an order issued Thursday that, “Upon review, the Court finds the Application is facially insufficient to satisfy the requirements of Rule 65(b)(1) for issuance of a temporary restraining order without notice.
“Specifically, Plaintiffs have not provided 'specific facts in an affidavit or a verified complaint [to] clearly show that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to [Plaintiffs] before the adverse party can be heard in opposition,” the order stated.
Instead, a hearing on the plaintiffs' application has been scheduled for Aug. 7.
The judge could still issue an injunction against the HISA rules after hearing from all parties at next Wednesday's hearing. The primary difference between a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction is that a temporary restraining order may be issued without notice to the opposing party and that a temporary restraining order is of limited duration.
The plaintiffs are individual owners, trainers and other Thoroughbred industry licensees who intend to compete at the upcoming Remington meet. They are: Joe Offolter, Danny Caldwell, Elizabeth Butler, Randy Blair, Bryan Hawk, Scott Young, Boyd Caster and Michael Major.
As in seven previous federal lawsuits initiated around the country since 2021 that have similarly targeted the HISA Authority and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) as defendants, the Oklahoma plaintiffs want declaratory judgments, injunctions, and restraining orders imposed that would invalidate HISA rules and prohibit the HISA Authority, the FTC, and the Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU) from enforcing the regulations that govern the sport.
Earlier this week, a different judge in that same Oklahoma federal court cancelled a Wednesday hearing in the case after learning that seven of the plaintiffs in this lawsuit last year filed a substantially similar complaint but voluntarily withdrew it three months later. The July 24, 2024, case was then reassigned to chief judge DeGiusti, the same federal judge who had handled that 2023 case.
Last year, DeGiusti had similarly ruled that the plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order was “facially insufficient.” The plaintiffs subsequently withdrew their motion and voluntarily dismissed their complaint.
Not a subscriber? Click here to sign up for the daily PDF or alerts.
