15 U.S.C. § 6309

Enforcement

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Injunctions

Whenever the Attorney General of the United States has reasonable cause to believe that a person is engaged in a violation of this chapter, the Attorney General may bring a civil action in the appropriate district court of the United States requesting such relief, including a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or other order, against the person, as the Attorney General determines to be necessary to restrain the person from continuing to engage in, sanction, promote, or otherwise participate in a professional boxing match in violation of this chapter.

(b) Criminal penalties(1) Managers, promoters, matchmakers, and licensees

Any manager, promoter, matchmaker, and licensee who knowingly violates, or coerces or causes any other person to violate, any provision of this chapter, other than section 6307a(b),11 So in original. Section 6307a does not contain a subsec. (b). 6307b, 6307c, 6307d, 6307e, 6307f, or 6307h of this title, shall, upon conviction, be imprisoned for not more than 1 year or fined not more than $20,000, or both.

(2) Violation of antiexploitation, sanctioning organization, or disclosure provisionsAny person who knowingly violates any provision of section 6307a(b),¹ 6307b, 6307c, 6307d, 6307e, 6307f, or 6307h of this title shall, upon conviction, be imprisoned for not more than 1 year or fined not more than—(A) $100,000; and(B) if a violation occurs in connection with a professional boxing match the gross revenues for which exceed $2,000,000, an additional amount which bears the same ratio to $100,000 as the amount of such revenues compared to $2,000,000, or both.(3) Conflict of interest

Any member or employee of a boxing commission, any person who administers or enforces State boxing laws, and any member of the Association of Boxing Commissions who knowingly violates section 6308(a) of this title shall, upon conviction, be imprisoned for not more than 1 year or fined not more than $20,000, or both.

(4) Boxers

Any boxer who knowingly violates any provision of this chapter shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $1,000.

(c) Actions by StatesWhenever the chief law enforcement officer of any State has reason to believe that a person or organization is engaging in practices which violate any requirement of this chapter, the State, as parens patriae, may bring a civil action on behalf of its residents in an appropriate district court of the United States—(1) to enjoin the holding of any professional boxing match which the practice involves;(2) to enforce compliance with this chapter;(3) to obtain the fines provided under subsection (b) or appropriate restitution; or(4) to obtain such other relief as the court may deem appropriate.(d) Private right of action

Any boxer who suffers economic injury as a result of a violation of any provision of this chapter may bring an action in the appropriate Federal or State court and recover the damages suffered, court costs, and reasonable attorneys fees and expenses.

(e) Enforcement against Federal Trade Commission, State Attorneys General, etc.Nothing in this chapter authorizes the enforcement of—(1) any provision of this chapter against the Federal Trade Commission, the United States Attorney General, or the chief legal officer of any State for acting or failing to act in an official capacity;(2) subsection (d) of this section against a State or political subdivision of a State, or any agency or instrumentality thereof; or(3)section 6307b of this title against a boxer acting in his capacity as a boxer.(Pub. L. 104–272, § 18, formerly § 10, Oct. 9, 1996, 110 Stat. 3312; renumbered § 18 and amended Pub. L. 106–210, §§ 4(1), 6, May 26, 2000, 114 Stat. 322, 326.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2000—Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 106–210, § 6(1), inserted “, other than section 6307a(b), 6307b, 6307c, 6307d, 6307e, 6307f, or 6307h of this title,” after “this chapter”.

Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 106–210, § 6(3), added par. (2). Former par. (2) redesignated (3).

Subsec. (b)(3), (4). Pub. L. 106–210, § 6(2), (4), redesignated pars. (2) and (3) as (3) and (4), respectively, and in par. (3) substituted “section 6308(a)” for “section 6308”.

Subsecs. (c) to (e). Pub. L. 106–210, § 6(5), added subsecs. (c) to (e).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1997, see section 23 of Pub. L. 104–272, set out as a note under section 6301 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case: Trout v. Org. Mundial de Boxeo, Inc., 965 F.3d 71 (1st Cir. 2020).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Trout v. Org. Mundial de Boxeo, Inc., 965 F.3d 71 (1st Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “The complaint included a claim under the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act ("MABRA"), 15 U.S.C. § 6309 (d), as well as claims under Puerto Rico law for breach of contract, fraud, and negligence.”

Sossamon v. Texas, 179 L. Ed. 2d 700 (2011). “§ 1715z-4a(b); 15 U.S.C. § 6309 (a). If the term “relief’ already connotes equitable relief—and only equitable relief—additional explication is redundant.”

Frazier v. Turning Stone Casino, 254 F. Supp. 2d 295 (N.D.N.Y. 2003). “” 15 U.S.C. § 6309 (d). Neither Plaintiff states a claim as a “boxer” as that term is defined in this Act, i.”

Tanvir v. Lynch, 128 F. Supp. 3d 756 (S.D.N.Y. 2015). “§ 1715z-4a(b); 15 U.S.C. § 6309 (a)). None of these statutes, however, concerns the creation of a damages remedy against federal officers in their personal capacities and, as such, the value of Plaintiffs' analogy is diminished.”

Sossamon v. Texas, 131 S. Ct. 1651 (2011). · cites it 2× “§1715z–4a(b); 15 U. S. C. §6309 (a). If the term “relief” already connotes equitable relief—and only equitable relief—additional explication is redundant.”

Main Events Prods., LLC v. Lacy, 358 F. Supp. 2d 391 (D.N.J. 2004). “The threshold issue is whether Lacy has alleged an economic injury that resulted from an alleged violation of the Ali Act.”

Toole (N.D. Fla. 2026). · cites it 3× “Ali Act claim (Count 1) Looking first to the Ali Act claim, the statute makes clear that only three categories of people may seek to enforce the statute: (1) the Attorney General of the United States ( 15 U.S.C. § 6309 (a)); (2) the “chief law enforcement officer of any State” (…”

Trout v. Organizacion Mundial De Boxeo, Inc. (D.P.R. 2023). “District Court Plaintiff, a boxer, sued defendant, a boxing organization, under the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act, 15 U.S.C. § 6309 (d) (“MABRA”), and for breach of contract, fraud, and negligence under Puerto Rico law (Docket No.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.