The District of Columbia has asked a federal judge to reject a bid by SeatGeek, Vivid Seats, TickPick, and Gametime to block its cap on ticket resale prices.
In a brief filed on Monday (November 9), the District argues that the resale platforms “dressed their policy objections up in constitutional garb and turned to this Court for a judicial veto.”
The filing, submitted to Judge Carl Nichols in the US District Court for the District of Columbia and obtained by MBW, can be read in full here.
The four marketplaces and trade group the Ticket Policy Forum (TPF) sued the District on October 14.
They want the court to block enforcement of the RESALE Act, which starts applying on January 1, 2027, while their challenge is decided.
The law caps the resale price of tickets to concerts, theatrical performances, and other live shows in D.C. at the original price paid, including fees and taxes, plus 10%.
It limits the service fee a resale marketplace can charge to a further 10% of that original price.
The RESALE Act also requires marketplaces to show buyers what each ticket originally cost.
Movie screenings and most sporting events in the District are exempt.
If the law applies as planned, the platforms say many sales of tickets to D.C. events would lose them money.
Their complaint cites the example of a USD $40 concert ticket resold for $44, the maximum the law permits.
On that sale, the marketplace could charge a fee of no more than $4 – less than its cost of completing the transaction, according to the complaint.
The plaintiffs further contend that the law illegally reaches sales taking place outside D.C., and that it was designed to favor local businesses over out-of-state companies.
According to the complaint, buyer and seller were both based in the District in fewer than 1% of covered sales on the plaintiffs’ marketplaces over the past year.
TPF and the four platforms want the court to declare the entire law invalid and to block its enforcement against them and other TPF members.
On their Takings Clause claim, they are seeking “just compensation” from the District as an alternative to an injunction, though the complaint does not specify a figure.
The District‘s response opens with its own account of how the resale market treats fans.
“When fans go to buy tickets to a concert, they often find that tickets sold out in milliseconds,” the District writes.
“Fans are then left to scour secondary ticket marketplaces (think StubHub) where tickets are resold for several times above the original price. All the while, the marketplaces profit off inflated ticket prices – the higher the markup, the more money the marketplace makes.”
“Plaintiffs lobbied against the Act, but they failed to persuade a single councilmember, congressperson, or senator,” the brief continues. “The D.C. Council voted unanimously to approve the Act, which was then signed by the Mayor and sailed through congressional review.”
The District contends that a court order stopping its own enforcement of the law would not protect the platforms.
Under the RESALE Act, any breach counts as an unlawful trade practice, which D.C. law allows individual consumers to sue over.
As a result, the filing states, the platforms “still will face liability come January 1 because private individuals could sue them.”
On the platforms’ claim that they often cannot know a ticket’s original price, the District says its consumer protection regulator will not penalize them for relying on a figure they reasonably believed to be accurate.
Where that price cannot be established, the platforms “can decline to host the resale,” according to the District.
“They have neither an obligation nor a right to engage in any and all resales,” the filing adds. “After all, the District could have banned ticket resales entirely.”
The District defends the law’s exemptions for sports and movies, arguing that live-entertainment events are scarcer.
“A sports team will play dozens of home games each season; and a movie will generally show at several times, at several theaters, for several weeks; but a concert tour will usually only stop once in the District,” it says.
On the platforms’ claims of financial harm, the District argues that any losses could be calculated and compensated later if they win, and are not large enough, relative to their businesses, to justify blocking the law now.
“Plaintiffs are all national corporations, and one member of Ticket Policy Forum, StubHub, makes over a billion dollars in revenue,” the filing states. “Even if Plaintiffs stand to face losses in one city, those losses are not so ‘significant’ when judged against the rest of Plaintiffs’ business.”
The District adds that several states have passed similar laws, yet there is “no evidence that Plaintiffs have pulled out of other states” because of them.
It further notes that the platforms have not, “to the District‘s knowledge, even challenged any other ticket resale law.”
Elsewhere, the District challenges the platforms’ position that their fees cover the cost of their services plus a reasonable return.
It points instead to StubHub, a TPF member that is not a plaintiff in the case.
The filing says StubHub “spent more than half of its $1.7 billion revenue in 2025 on sales and marketing – not costs associated with facilitating resales or customer services.”
StubHub‘s full-year 2025 results show sales and marketing expenses of USD $971.7 million against revenue of USD $1.75 billion.
The filing points to a second challenge to the law, brought on October 16 by the National Association of Ticketing Professionals and two professional resellers.
That suit targets only the price cap, and the District argues that the two sets of plaintiffs’ disagreement over which parts of the law should be blocked weakens their case.
The D.C. Council passed the RESALE Act unanimously in July, after Councilmember Charles Allen introduced it in April 2025.
Mayor Muriel Bowser signed the bill on August 10, and it became law on September 25 after a congressional review period.
The District‘s filing also cites President Donald Trump‘s March 2025 executive order on ticketing, which took aim at “unscrupulous middlemen” who “impose egregious fees while providing minimal value.”
Maine and Vermont have passed laws capping resale prices, and Rhode Island has limited resale markups for decades, according to statutes cited in the District‘s filing.
In California, a proposed 10% cap, narrowed in May to independent venues with capacities of 3,000 or fewer, died in a state Senate committee in August.
The Hollywood Reporter has reported that more than USD $1 million of StubHub‘s California lobbying spend between April and June this year went to the TPF.
Live Nation, which owns Ticketmaster, has said it backs resale price caps.
When the suit was filed, TPF Executive Director Brian Berry said the law would “drive ticket sales into the shadows,” and criticized its exemption for primary ticket sales such as those handled by Ticketmaster.
The platforms have asked for a ruling on their request by December 10, which would leave time for an appeal, as MBW reported in October.Music Business Worldwide
