FIGHT Act of 2025
Summary
What This Bill Does
The FIGHT Act strengthens federal animal-fighting enforcement. It adds a definition of rooster as a male member of the Gallus Domesticus species older than six months. It revises Animal Welfare Act section 26 to keep the prohibition on sponsoring or exhibiting animals in an animal fighting venture and adds a specific prohibition on gambling on an animal fighting venture, including in-person or broadcast events. It expands the transport-related provisions to cover transport of roosters connected to animal fighting. The bill also creates a citizen-suit-style enforcement tool: any person may file a federal district court action to enjoin an alleged violation after giving at least 60 days notice to the Agriculture Secretary and local law enforcement. If a violation is found in such a suit, the court may impose a fine of up to $5,000 for each violation. The bill therefore targets the financial and logistics networks around cockfighting and other animal fighting, not only the people physically staging fights.
Who Benefits and How
Animal welfare organizations benefit from a private civil enforcement tool to seek injunctions against alleged animal fighting violations. Local law enforcement benefits because citizen-suit notice can surface alleged violations before a federal action is filed. USDA Animal Welfare Act staff benefit from clearer rooster and gambling provisions for animal-fighting enforcement. Communities affected by animal fighting benefit if gambling, broadcast events, and transport support networks are disrupted.
Who Bears the Burden and How
Cockfighting venture sponsors must stop sponsoring or exhibiting animals in fights and face injunctions plus up to $5,000 per violation in private suits. Animal fighting gamblers must stop wagering on in-person or broadcast animal fighting events because the bill creates a direct federal gambling prohibition. Rooster transporters must avoid transporting roosters for animal fighting ventures or face Animal Welfare Act enforcement exposure. Federal courts must process private injunction suits, evaluate 60-day notice compliance, and decide whether per-violation fines apply.
Key Provisions
- Defines rooster as a male Gallus Domesticus older than six months.
- Prohibits gambling on animal fighting ventures, including in-person or broadcast events.
- Expands animal-fighting restrictions to cover rooster transport.
- Creates private civil suits to enjoin alleged Animal Welfare Act section 26 violations.
- Authorizes federal courts to impose up to $5,000 per violation in private suits.
- Requires 60 days notice to USDA and local law enforcement before private suit filing.
Evidence Chain:
This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.
At a Glance
What This Bill Does
Amends the Animal Welfare Act to define roosters, prohibit gambling on animal fighting ventures including in-person or broadcast events, restrict transport of roosters for animal fighting purposes, authorize private civil suits after notice to USDA and local law enforcement, allow district courts to impose up to $5,000 per violation in those suits, and preserve Secretary enforcement authority.
Key Policy Areas
Animal Welfare, Gambling, Criminal Justice
Primary Purpose
Amends the Animal Welfare Act to define roosters, prohibit gambling on animal fighting ventures including in-person or broadcast events, restrict transport of roosters for animal fighting purposes, authorize private civil suits after notice to USDA and local law enforcement, allow district courts to impose up to $5,000 per violation in those suits, and preserve Secretary enforcement authority.
Policy Domains
Resolution provisions
Identified Gains
- Animal welfare organizations
- Local law enforcement
- USDA Animal Welfare Act staff
- Communities affected by animal fighting
Identified Costs
- Cockfighting venture sponsors
- Animal fighting gamblers
- Rooster transporters
- Federal courts
Sponsors
Legislative Progress
In CommitteeMr. Bacon (for himself, Mr. Grothman, Mr. Zinke, Mr. Garbarino, …
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Introduced in House
Stakeholder Effects
cui bono?How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.
Animal fighting gamblers, Cockfighting venture sponsors
Bill Structure & Actor Mappings
Who is "The Secretary" in each section?
We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.
Learn more about our methodology