Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
This bill amends the Animal Welfare Act to add a definition of “rooster” and to broaden prohibitions on animal fighting. It makes sponsoring, exhibiting, attending (including causing minors under 16 to attend), and gambling on animal fighting ventures unlawful, including gambling on broadcast events.
Civil forfeiture: liberals/centrists want safeguards; conservatives oppose broad seizures
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive statutory amendment that establishes new prohibitions and enforcement mechanisms concerning roosters and animal fighting-related gambling and transport; it sets out concrete legal remedies and penalties but leaves several implementation and fiscal details unaddressed.
This bill amends the Animal Welfare Act to add a definition of “rooster” and to broaden prohibitions on animal fighting.
It makes sponsoring, exhibiting, attending (including causing minors under 16 to attend), and gambling on animal fighting ventures unlawful, including gambling on broadcast events.
The bill expands prohibitions on using the mail or other interstate instrumentalities to transport roosters or advertise ventures, makes related matter nonmailable, and creates a private civil right of action with fines (up to $5,000 per violation) and a 60‑day notice requirement.
Targeted animal-welfare reforms increase viability, but contentious enforcement tools (forfeiture, citizen suits, mail bans) raise legal and political resistance.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive statutory amendment that establishes new prohibitions and enforcement mechanisms concerning roosters and animal fighting-related gambling and transport; it sets out concrete legal remedies and penalties but leaves several implementation and fiscal details unaddressed.
Civil forfeiture: liberals/centrists want safeguards; conservatives oppose broad seizures
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Civil forfeiture: liberals/centrists want safeguards; conservatives oppose broad seizures
Likely supportive overall because the bill strengthens animal welfare protections and curbs gambling and child exposure.
They will welcome private enforcement tools but may worry about civil forfeiture and due‑process safeguards.
They may push for stronger penalties and clearer safeguards for vulnerable groups and against overbroad property seizure.
Generally favorable to banning animal fighting and protecting children, but cautious about new private suits and broad forfeiture powers.
Will look for precise definitions and safeguards to limit unintended federal overreach and to ensure proportional penalties.
Seeks clearer enforcement mechanisms and coordination with states.
Supports banning animal cruelty in principle but is concerned about federal expansion, private citizen lawsuits, and sweeping civil forfeiture.
Views restrictions on interstate commerce, mail, and advertising as potential federal overreach.
Likely to press for stronger property rights and limits on private litigation.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Targeted animal-welfare reforms increase viability, but contentious enforcement tools (forfeiture, citizen suits, mail bans) raise legal and political resistance.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Civil forfeiture: liberals/centrists want safeguards; conservatives oppose broad seizures
Targeted animal-welfare reforms increase viability, but contentious enforcement tools (forfeiture, citizen suits, mail bans) raise legal an…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive statutory amendment that establishes new prohibitions and enforcement mechanisms concerning roosters and animal fighting-related gambling and transpo…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.