FTC ALJ Reimposes $25,000 Fine, Calls HISA Sanction Overly Lenient

Jay L. Himes, the Federal Trade Commission-assigned administrative law judge, signed a 130-page decision that re-imposed a $25,000 penalty the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority and its Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit had earlier withdrawn, a ruling dated Sept. 12 and publicly released Sept. 15 that Himes described with scathing language and procedural concern. Himes modified the original adjudication by adding back the $25,000, and he wrote that the agencies’ reasoning “misses the forest for the trees,” creating a “catch-22” where “Serpe cannot have his Seventh Amendment claim heard either on this review or in his Federal Action.”

The affected trainer is Phil Serpe, described in filings as a currently suspended, 66-year-old, East Coast-based conditioner and veteran Thoroughbred trainer. For nearly half a year Serpe has asserted that HISA and HIWU’s withdrawal of the threatened fine was an “alleged end-around” intended to prevent his federal lawsuit from advancing on his claim that he was wrongfully denied a jury trial. The administrative action that produced the fine followed an initial HIWU arbitrator decision that Serpe then appealed to the FTC, triggering Himes’ FTC-level review.

Enforcement of Himes’ re-imposed penalty was immediately thrust into uncertainty when the Federal Trade Commission issued an order staying the issuance of the $25,000 fine “late on Tuesday,” a stay that came barely one day after the ALJ imposed the penalty. With the stay in place, the monetary sanction cannot be issued while the FTC considers further procedural or substantive steps, leaving both collected penalties and Serpe’s suspension status in operational limbo for racing regulators and stables that track trainer eligibility.

The Himes decision is not an isolated rebuke of HISA. Chief administrative law judge D. Michael Chappell, in a separate FTC-level appeal by an appellant named Peacock, sided with jockeys over HISA’s interpretation of crop strikes and safety, ruling that HISA had inappropriately extended its prohibitions to neck and shoulder uses that were made to prevent a horse from lugging. Chappell warned, “If you're going to go fight something, you better believe you're 100% in the right or you're just wasting your time.” Peacock warned that had the appeal failed it would set a dangerous precedent “that jockeys risking their lives would be penalized for trying to preserve safety.”

Administrative dockets show Himes presiding in other technical disputes as well. A separate FTC filing in Docket No. D-9443, filed 12/26/2025 in the matter of Dr. Larry Overly, DVM, lists Hon. Jay L. Himes as the ALJ and contains granular evidentiary disputes over treatment logs, lot numbers for Testosterone administered to a horse named Cosmo, and Dr. Benson’s critique that medical records explaining treatment were not produced. That filing includes the assertion, “Agree that Appellant produced three DEA treatment logs and pharmacy records. Deny the Treatment Logs were ‘deficient’.”

With Himes’ 130-page critique and the FTC’s stay now on the record, the immediate effect is procedural: the $25,000 penalty will not be issued while the FTC evaluates the matter, and Serpe’s claim over a constitutional jury right remains unresolved. Multiple FTC judges questioning HISA’s interpretations signals a broader institutional moment for how banned-substance adjudications and jockey-safety disputes will be handled going forward.