23XI Racing co-owners Denny Hamlin, and NBA Hall of Famer, Michael Jordan - Source: Getty Images for NASCAR
Hot News NASCAR Cup Series

NASCAR News: The Fight For the Finish Line – Lawsuit Latest (4th Update)

Posted by AR1 staff

23XI/FRM has filed its response to NASCAR motion for summary judgment. “The motion is a meandering combination of mischaracterizations of Plaintiffs’ claims, misstatements of governing antitrust law, and disputed facts that must go to trial.”

23XI/FRM say case shouldn’t be thrown out because:

  • NASCAR pays below-market terms to premier stock car racing teams, harming team enterprise value
  • No alternative for teams because NASCAR sanction agreements keep tracks from having other stock-car events
  • Cannot run Next Gen car anywhere else
October 16, 2025 

In a filing Monday night, NASCAR asked the Western District Court of North Carolina to order the parties to participate in a judicial settlement conference to be convened by the Court and appoint a judicial officer, such as the magistrate judge assigned to this case or another judicial officer, to preside over the settlement conference.

In response, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports say that NASCAR’s request for a settlement conference is “another effort to play to the court of public opinion” and not a move toward resolution.

There has been no resolution between the parties to this point, including when an in-person mediation session was held on August 5, 2025, which was overseen by Jeffrey A. Mishkin, and NASCAR is asking for the same Jeffrey A. Mishkin to oversee the settlement conference. The teams feel this would be redundant as they already tried an arbitration session with Mishkin.

Settlement Conference Request
October 4, 2025 

NASCAR has filed a motion for summary judgment in federal court, seeking to dismiss the antitrust lawsuit brought by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports (FRM) over the charter system.

The filing, submitted on a Friday night following the close of fact discovery, argues that the teams’ claims under the Sherman Act lack merit and should be resolved without a trial. NASCAR emphasizes the need to swiftly end the litigation to refocus on on-track racing for the remainder of 2025 and preparations for the pivotal 2026 season.

The 121-page document includes declarations from prominent team owners supporting the charter system and expressing concerns about the lawsuit’s impact on the sport’s stability.

It includes a 35-page memorandum of law, redacted/unredacted supporting materials, and declarations from 11 team owners/executives supporting the charter system.

Background on the Dispute

The lawsuit originated from disagreements over NASCAR’s charter agreement, which was introduced in 2016 to provide teams with equity value and stability. The current deal, running from 2025 to 2031, has been signed by all Cup Series teams except 23XI and FRM. Last year, the two teams acquired charters from the shuttered Stewart-Haas Racing and subsequently challenged the system as anticompetitive. NASCAR’s filing contrasts this with a previous unsuccessful motion to dismiss and seeks a merits-based ruling without a jury trial.

NASCAR’s Key Arguments

NASCAR contends that the bulk of the alleged anticompetitive conduct—such as the 2016 acquisition of ARCA Racing Series and the merger with International Speedway Corporation—falls outside the statute of limitations, occurring between 2016 and 2019. It also notes that both teams previously raced under a “release clause” barring lawsuits against NASCAR and benefited from the 2016-2024 charter agreement without issue. The sanctioning body argues the teams have failed to demonstrate “aggregated damages” or intent to create a rival series, and that 23XI entered the sport “eyes wide open” to the charter system’s structure.

In a pointed critique, the filing accuses the teams of pursuing the suit for personal gain rather than the sport’s benefit: “Neither greed, nor an individual’s bruised ego over his inability to deliver on some promises he made to other Teams, justifies trying to destroy an institution that countless people, including the France family, tracks, Team owners, and drivers have spent decades developing and growing.” It further states: “Plaintiffs’ case should come to an end (as the garage wants) so that the focus can return to exciting racing on the track for the remainder of 2025 and planning can begin for a pivotal 2026 season.”

NASCAR rejects the teams’ proposed market definition of “stock car teams” as overly narrow and “gerrymandered,” arguing: “Plaintiffs’ gerrymandered, fail-safe, alleged market should be rejected as a matter of law, even if the testimony of their expert satisfied Rule 702, which it does not.” On the charter system’s merits, the filing highlights its success: “Plaintiffs cannot succeed on either of their Sherman Act claims, including their claim that the Charter Agreement itself is an unlawful agreement in restraint of trade. The Charter system has created more than $1.5 billion in equity value for racing teams since it started in 2016. The value of a Charter has increased by approximately $20 million dollars since Plaintiffs 23XI and Front Row reached agreements to purchase Charters from Stewart-Haas Racing last year, and interest in acquiring them remains high. … Plaintiffs assert that they are fighting for a ‘fair’ Charter system for all Teams, but they are the only ones that want this lawsuit. Consistent with that, they are seeking over in made-up treble damages to put in their own pockets, irrespective of the impact it has on the sport and the other Teams going forward.”

Additionally, NASCAR asserts: “Plaintiffs fail to provide any evidence on essential elements under the rule of reason.”

Support from Team Owners to see the lawsuit settled

The filing incorporates declarations from 11 team owners and executives, who largely endorse the charter system for fostering investment and stability while decrying the litigation’s uncertainty. While none of the team owners had the cajones to admit NASCAR acts like a monoply, they all say they want the lawsuit settled because of the uncertainty it brings to the sport. Key quotes include:

– Rick Hendrick (Hendrick Motorsports): “The Charter Agreement is critical to the stability of the NASCAR ecosystem – the teams, the businesses that support us and NASCAR itself. Without this framework in place, I question the long-term viability of the teams, including Hendrick Motorsports, and do not believe we would be able to survive. Undoing what we have collectively negotiated will not only result in immeasurable damage to our sport and our respective businesses, it will, most importantly, hurt the people and families that depend on us for their livelihoods. Although NASCAR asked me to provide this declaration, I am doing so voluntarily, of my own free will and without bias toward either party. More than anything, I hope the matter is resolved in a way that does not put the sport at risk.”

– Joe Gibbs (Joe Gibbs Racing): “I think that the Charter system has created equity value, though it is imperative that the equity value become permanent. I have repeatedly expressed my strong desire for the Charter system to become permanent in nature, and I continue to hold out hope that will one day be the case. Doing so would, in my view, solidify the financial health and well-being of the Cup teams and the sport as a whole.”

– Roger Penske (Team Penske): “I signed the 2025 Charters because I felt that NASCAR was not going to move any further on their document and it was time for our team to go forward. My belief in the value of the NASCAR Charter system is confirmed by the fact that, based on my experience with NASCAR’s Charter system since 2016, I decided to create a Charter-type system in IndyCar. In 2024, the NTT INDY CAR SERIES and all teams racing full time in IndyCar entered into a charter agreement effective for the 2025 season. The IndyCar Charter has some similarities to the NASCAR Charter and I believe has brought value to our series. Attempting to address team concerns with the cost to race in Cup Series races, NASCAR with feedback from the teams, introduced what is called Next Gen car. Since the Next Gen car began racing in 2022, Team Penske’s Cup Series race car costs have been reduced due to a smaller number of race cars in the fleet and a lesser volume of parts replacements. In addition to cost efficiencies, the Next Gen car has enhanced on-track racing for our team and certainly others. I am presenting this declaration with the hope that the parties to the litigation can settle the litigation as soon as possible.”

– Gordon Smith (HYAK Motorsports): “I have significant concerns about the current litigation given the uncertainty it brings and the detrimental effect it may have on the future of the sport. More than anything, I hope that the litigation is resolved in a manner that protects the future viability of our incredible sport, and creates greater stability and certainty for all participants and stakeholders.”

Declarations from other owners, including Richard Childress, Brad Keselowski, Carl Long, BJ McLeod, Rick Ware, Cal Wells, and Jon Wood, echo themes of support for the charters and calls for resolution to safeguard the sport’s future.

Perspective of the Teams who brought the lawsuit

23XI and FRM maintain that NASCAR dominates the “stock car teams” market, enabling anticompetitive practices, and position their suit as a push for a fairer charter system benefiting all teams. However, NASCAR counters that the teams seek personal treble damages at the expense of the broader garage.

Jeffrey Kessler, attorney for 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports issued a statement Friday night after NASCAR’s filing:

“The declarations submitted by the various teams are supportive of my clients’ position. My clients are not, and never have been, seeking to eliminate the charter system. They have supported charters because teams cannot survive without them.

“The declarations from team owners and executives acknowledge this same economic reality. Nor do they excuse NASCAR’s anticompetitive conduct or its unlawful monopoly, points 23XI and Front Row have maintained from the start.

“Many teams have expressed a desire to resolve this matter, a goal my clients share, but NASCAR has yet to demonstrate a similar willingness to engage in meaningful resolution.

“We are confident NASCAR’s summary judgment motion is not going to succeed. This lawsuit has always been about making NASCAR more competitive and fair for the benefit of drivers, sponsors, teams, and fans who love the sport. NASCAR’S new motion changes nothing and we look forward to presenting our case at trial on December 1.”

Next Steps

The motion aims for a proactive ruling to dismiss the case, with owners like Hendrick, Penske, and Smith advocating for settlement or resolution to avoid long-term harm. The litigation remains ongoing, but NASCAR’s filing underscores a unified garage desire to move past the dispute and prioritize racing.

23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports filed a motion Sept. 13 seeking a summary judgment on NASCAR’s counterclaims. A hearing on that motion is scheduled for Oct. 21.

October 2, 2025 

In an escalating antitrust lawsuit against NASCAR, 23XI Racing (co-owned by Michael Jordan and Denny Hamlin) and Front Row Motorsports are urging a federal judge to issue a partial summary judgment declaring the NASCAR Cup Series as a distinct market where NASCAR holds unchallenged monopsony power.

The teams argue that NASCAR is the sole buyer of premier stock car racing services, with no viable alternatives for competitors due to high barriers to entry and NASCAR’s 100% market share, violating federal antitrust laws.

They cite NASCAR’s own admissions in filings and depositions to support this, and seek to estop NASCAR from contradicting its prior positions, potentially dismissing the sanctioning body’s counterclaim.

The dispute originates from disagreements over the 2025 charter agreement, which the teams view as exploitative given NASCAR’s dominance. NASCAR has yet to respond to the latest motion (due by October 15), but previously contended that teams could pivot to series like IndyCar or Formula 1, suggesting a broader relevant market.

With a trial set for December 1, a favorable ruling could streamline proceedings, affirm NASCAR’s market control, and reshape negotiations in the sport; otherwise, the issue may go to a jury, prolonging the legal fight.

September 5, 2025 

In the heart of Charlotte, North Carolina, the hum of race engines was drowned out by the clatter of legal briefs and the tension of a courtroom lawsuit showdown. It was July 2025, and 23XI Racing, co-owned by Michael Jordan and Denny Hamlin (pictured), along with Front Row Motorsports (FRM), owned by Bob Jenkins, were locked in a high-stakes battle against NASCAR.

–by Mark Cipolloni–

The two teams had filed a federal antitrust lawsuit in October 2024, accusing NASCAR and its CEO, Jim France, of monopolistic practices that stifled competition and unfairly controlled the sport’s economic landscape. At stake were their six NASCAR Cup Series charters—franchise-like agreements guaranteeing race entries and substantial prize money—valued at up to $270 million combined.

Related Article:  NASCAR News: It’s Tit-for-Tat in the NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit

The trouble began in September 2024, when NASCAR presented a “take-it-or-leave-it” charter agreement extension to its 15 Cup Series teams, set to expire at year’s end. Thirteen teams signed, some under duress, but 23XI and FRM refused, citing terms that restricted their ability to sue NASCAR and failed to address key demands like permanent charters and a fairer revenue split.

The teams argued NASCAR’s practices—owning most premier racetracks, acquiring rival series ARCA, and enforcing exclusivity deals—created a monopoly that left teams no choice but to accept unfavorable terms.

Inside 23XI’s sleek headquarters, Denny Hamlin paced the floor, his three Daytona 500 wins feeling distant as he faced a different kind of race. Michael Jordan, his co-owner, sat at a conference table, his competitive fire undimmed from his NBA days.

“This isn’t about us,” Jordan said, his voice steady. “It’s about making the sport fair for every team, driver, and fan.” Across town, Bob Jenkins echoed the sentiment at FRM’s shop, knowing the loss of their charters could cripple his team financially. Both teams had already secured a preliminary injunction in December 2024, allowing them to race as chartered teams in 2025 while the lawsuit proceeded.

But the tide turned in June 2025. The U.S. Court of Appeals’ Fourth Circuit, led by Judge Paul Niemeyer, vacated the injunction, ruling that the teams’ antitrust argument—centered on NASCAR’s requirement to release legal claims as a condition of charter agreements—was unsupported by precedent. The decision, finalized on July 9, 2025, after the teams’ request for a full-court rehearing was denied, meant their charters would be revoked starting at Dover Motor Speedway on July 20th.

Without charters, 23XI’s drivers—Tyler Reddick, Bubba Wallace, and Riley Herbst—and FRM’s trio would race as “open” teams, forced to qualify on speed and earning less than a third of the purse money. Worse, a clause in Reddick’s contract allowed him to leave if 23XI couldn’t provide a chartered car, threatening to make the 2024 regular-season champion a free agent.

Desperate to avoid “irreparable harm,” the teams filed for a new preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order on July 14, 2025, alleging NASCAR planned to sell their charters to other teams, potentially wiping out their businesses. Their attorney, Jeffrey Kessler, a heavyweight in antitrust law, argued that losing charters could force sponsors and drivers to jump ship, jeopardizing their playoff hopes and long-term viability. NASCAR countered, calling the lawsuit “baseless” and accusing 23XI and FRM of colluding to force better terms, even alleging that 23XI’s Curtis Polk tried to organize a boycott of a Daytona qualifying race.

On July 17, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Bell denied the temporary restraining order, noting that NASCAR agreed not to sell the charters until the new injunction was decided and that the teams’ cars would likely qualify for the next two races at Dover and Indianapolis due to smaller fields. But the teams weren’t out of the woods. A hearing for the new injunction was set for August 28, 2025, with the trial looming on December 1.

As the teams prepared for Dover, Hamlin rallied his drivers. “We’re racing for more than points now,” he told Reddick, whose fifth-place standing in the 2025 points race hung in the balance.

Jenkins, meanwhile, worked late with his crew, knowing FRM’s slimmer budget made the financial hit of “open” status even more brutal. Both teams vowed to fight on, fueled by a belief that their lawsuit could reshape NASCAR’s future. The courtroom was their new racetrack, and the finish line—a fairer, more competitive sport—was still in sight, even as their charters hung by a thread.

NASCAR’s latest legal filing, made late in the evening on August 17th against the team’s continued fight for an injunction that would allow them to keep racing with their charters, argues forcefully against any injunction.

NASCAR states that the court cannot compel it to do business with parties it does not wish to. This is a key argument in the NASCAR lawsuit, as the league stresses its right to manage team agreements independently. Another central point in NASCAR’s filing is that the teams are unlikely to succeed in legal claims alleging that NASCAR is a monopoly.

Motorsports journalist Jeff Gluck posted a summary of NASCAR’s latest legal stance on X, the sanctioning body opposes the injunction on multiple fronts.