New Horse Protection Act Mandates Scientific Testing and Centralizes Enforcement Authority in 180 Days

The “Protecting Horses from Soring Act of 2025” is a major overhaul of how horse abuse is policed at shows and auctions, specifically targeting the cruel practice of “soring” (intentionally injuring a horse's legs to force a high-stepping gait). If you’re involved in the horse industry—especially with Tennessee Walking, Spotted Saddle, or Racking horses—this bill is about to fundamentally change how you operate, inspect, and enforce the rules.

The End of the Old Guard: Centralizing Inspection Power

The biggest structural change here is the creation of a brand-new, federally mandated organization called the Horse Industry Organization (HIO). The Secretary of Agriculture has 180 days to get this group up and running. This HIO isn’t just adding another layer of bureaucracy; it’s replacing the old system entirely. Once the new HIO is certified, the Secretary must revoke the certification of every other previously certified horse industry organization within 90 days (SEC. 4). This means all licensing, training, and enforcement authority for inspectors gets funneled into this single new entity.

The Scientific Mandate: What is an ‘Objective Inspection’?

Say goodbye to subjective judgment calls. This bill introduces a strict new definition: “Objective inspection” (SEC. 2). This inspection must be conducted by a veterinarian or vet technician and rely only on scientific methods, which must include swabbing and blood testing. For any testing method to be approved, it has to pass three tests: it must be proven reliable and repeatable, it must have gone through peer review, and the Secretary of Agriculture has to agree that the scientific community generally accepts it. For trainers and owners, this is a game-changer: if a horse is found sore based on this objective inspection, it faces a mandatory disqualification of at least 30 days for a first offense, jumping to at least 90 days for a second offense (SEC. 4).

The Conflict of Interest Firewall

One of the bill's strongest provisions is the strict conflict-of-interest rule for the new HIO inspectors. Anyone licensed by the HIO—and their immediate family—cannot be employed by, or provide services to, show managers, trainers, owners, or exhibitors of the specific breeds most associated with soring (Tennessee Walking, Spotted Saddle, or Racking horses). They also can’t be involved in training, showing, breeding, or selling those breeds (SEC. 4). This is a clear attempt to ensure the people doing the inspections have no financial ties to the people they are inspecting, addressing a major criticism of the previous industry-led enforcement model.

Who’s Running the Show? Governance Concerns

While the goal is cleaner enforcement, the structure of the new HIO Board raises an eyebrow. The Board will have up to nine members, but the initial appointments are heavily weighted: the Agriculture Commissioners of Tennessee and Kentucky each pick two members. These four then pick two more members who represent the Tennessee Walking Horse industry. Only after that do the remaining members get chosen (SEC. 4). Given that Tennessee and Kentucky are the heart of the Walking Horse industry, this structure ensures that state and industry interests have significant control over the national enforcement body from day one. This concentration of power—especially replacing all existing organizations with one governed primarily by the states most affected—is the kind of detail that policy wonks flag as a potential governance risk, even if the intent is to improve animal welfare.