Facing Banned Substance Charges, Mixed Meet Vet Says HISA Rules Don’t Cover Meds Meant for Quarter Horses

[Wandering Eyes]

Yet New Mexico Commission Asserts Neither Drug Allowed at State Level, Either

by T.D. Thornton

A federal lawsuit filed last month by a Sunland Park-based veterinarian against the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority (HISA) and Horseracing Integrity and Welfare Unit (HIWU) is alleging anti-constitutionality claims similar to a number of other cases that have been swirling at various levels of the federal court system for the past four years.

But the civil complaint initiated July 3 in United States District Court (District of New Mexico) by Jason Scott, DVM, does involve one new legal question that has yet to be litigated:

What happens at a mixed meet where both Thoroughbreds and Quarter Horses race, and a veterinarian who is a HISA “covered person” is found in possession of medications that are prohibited for use in Thoroughbreds, but the vet claims those substances were solely intended for Quarter Horses, whose regulation is outside of HISA's jurisdiction?

Scott's lawsuit stems from a Feb. 13, 2025 search of his truck at Sunland, during which HIWU agents found bottles of the injectables Sarapin (also known as Pitcher plant extract) and Adenosine Monophosphate (commonly referred to as “AMP”).

Sarapin is an analgesic that is used to manage muscle or joint pain. AMP is a vasodilator.

Both are listed under HISA rules as “banned” substances that are never to be found in any covered Thoroughbred or possessed on any HISA-regulated grounds.

Since 2023, HIWU has suspended and fined three veterinarians and one other covered person for possession of Sarapin. All were in Ohio, and several of those cases were related.

In all four cases, Sarapin was found with other banned substances, so the penalties varied, from just a three-month suspension and no fine (in two cases) to a six-year suspension and $75,000 fine (for the case deemed most egregious).

There are no recorded violations for possession of AMP listed on the HIWU resolutions portal.

Scott's lawsuit described the two substances from the perspective of a veterinarian claiming he used them just to treat Quarter Horses.

“Like Sarapin, AMP is authorized for use in Quarter Horses and is commonly used to treat rhabdomyolysis, sometimes called 'tying up,' which is a physiological response to intense exercise,” the lawsuit stated. “Because it is a naturally occurring substance, AMP is thought to be a more conservative aid to the recovery process than some other medications.”

Scott continued: “In New Mexico, both medications are understood to be authorized for use in Quarter Horses. The New Mexico Racing Commission [NMRC] has adopted the model rules of the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ARCI), which do not identify either substance as a 'Banned Substance.'

“The use of both AMP and Sarapin on Quarter Horses in New Mexico is widespread, notorious, and expressly permitted by regulatory authorities in New Mexico,” Scott's lawsuit stated.

Yet HISA, in an Aug. 4 court filing that opposed Scott's motion for a preliminary injunction, attached as an exhibit a letter dated Aug. 1 from NMRC executive director Izzy Trejo that stated pretty much the opposite was true.

“Under the NMRC Rules, compounded Sarapin and AMP are not permitted for use in Quarter Horses at New Mexico racetracks,” Trejo wrote.

“Neither Sarapin nor AMP are listed on ARCI's Uniform Classification Guidelines for Foreign Substances,” Trejo wrote.

Trejo explained that an NMRC rule requires veterinarians to submit to the Commission the name of any medication that the veterinarian would like to use on a Quarter Horse at a New Mexico track when that medication is not listed by the ARCI so that the substance may be submitted to ARCI for consideration of classification.

“The NMRC has not received any request to submit Sarapin or AMP to ARCI for consideration of classification,” Trejo wrote.

Beyond the disputed issue of whether the state of New Mexico condoned Sarapin and AMP usage in Quarter Horses, Scott's complaint alleged that in order to defend against the HIWU charges, “the Authority (erroneously) requires that Dr. Scott establish a 'compelling justification' for his possession of these substances.”

Scott's lawsuit stated that “The Authority's published rules and decisions never clarify what this term means, what factors an adjudicator should consider, or how practicing veterinarians with a Mixed Practice must adjust their day-to-day business to comply with federal law.

“Worse, [Scott] is expressly barred from asking a jury of his peers whether his proffered justifications are compelling. Instead, that decision is left solely to the discretion of an unaccountable arbitrator and, later, an administrative law judge,” the lawsuit stated.

HISA's legal filing on Tuesday asked the judge to view Scott's position this way:

“Plaintiff, a licensed veterinarian registered under HISA, filed this suit shortly after he was charged with violating an Federal Trade Commission (FTC)-approved health-and-safety rule that bans possession of certain harmful substances. He now seeks a preliminary injunction based on kitchen-sink claims that the Act and its implementing rules are invalid under the public and private nondelegation doctrines, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Seventh Amendment.

“But no emergency warrants that extraordinary relief,” HISA's court filing continued. “The only imminent inconvenience Plaintiff alleges is having to participate in private arbitration on the banned-substances charge. The arbitration hearing (scheduled for Sept. 15) will allow Plaintiff to build a factual record and try to establish that he is not liable at all (as he argues here).”

“In the meantime, Plaintiff remains free to continue treating covered horses or otherwise engage in horseracing activities without limitation,” HISA's filing stated.

“If any sanction were imposed after completion of the initial arbitration, it would be subject to further FTC review under the Act and ultimately judicial review in federal court,” the HISA filing stated.

“As [a legal precedent] makes clear, Plaintiff thus faces no irreparable harm—'the single most important prerequisite for the issuance of a preliminary injunction,'” the HISA filing stated.

“The Court can stop there,” HISA's court filing stated.

The post Facing Banned Substance Charges, Mixed Meet Vet Says HISA Rules Don’t Cover Meds Meant for Quarter Horses appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

View the full article