Likely outcomes should NASCAR lose antitrust lawsuit in court

Denny Hamlin met with the media Thursday at Championship 4 media availability in Phoenix and based on what he said, it certainly appears the antitrust lawsuit against NASCAR is headed to a jury trial.

Fox Sports’ Bob Pockrass asked him about his focus this week and the status of reported lawsuit settlement discussions:

Pockrass: …some movement in the lawsuit and more settlement stuff. I’m curious, do you get updates this week or do you ask to be left alone this week?

Hamlin: No. I always get updates, um, about everything. But, you know, mostly that stuff was all through media and not actual, uh, dialog.

Pockrass: So there’s nothing close?

Hamlin: No.

Denny Hamlin said he has been getting updates on the lawsuit this week — he hasn’t asked to just concentrate on racing for the title — but indicated no settlement is imminent. pic.twitter.com/oAeYwUfykJ

— Bob Pockrass (@bobpockrass) October 30, 2025

October 28, 2025

The ongoing antitrust lawsuit, filed in October 2024 by 23XI Racing (co-owned by Michael Jordan and Denny Hamlin) and Front Row Motorsports against NASCAR and its chairman Jim France, centers on allegations of monopolistic and anticompetitive practices in the market for “premier stock-car racing.”

–by Mark Cipolloni–

The teams claim NASCAR leverages its dominance—controlling 20 of 38 Cup Series tracks, dictating purse payouts, mandating single-source suppliers for Next Gen car parts, and prohibiting teams and tracks from engaging with rival series—to impose unfair terms in the 2025-2031 charter agreement.

This includes below-market revenue splits (teams get about 50% of media rights, up from 37% but still deemed insufficient), a clause waiving teams’ right to sue NASCAR, and threats of economic ruin for non-signing teams. Without favorable charters, the plaintiffs argue, their operations are unsustainable, risking shutdowns and broader harm to the sport’s ecosystem.

Recent developments include a failed two-day mediation on October 21-22, 2025, overseen by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Bell, which could not bridge the divide despite “productive” talks. On October 28, 2025, Bell dismissed NASCAR’s counterclaim alleging illegal collusion by the teams during 2023 charter negotiations, ruling their actions (like a boycott of a team owners’ council meeting) were legitimate bargaining tactics with minimal impact.

The case is now fast-tracked to a jury trial starting December 1, 2025, in Charlotte, North Carolina, following a final pretrial hearing on November 12.

Potential Outcomes if NASCAR Is Found to Have Violated Antitrust Laws

If a jury determines NASCAR violated federal antitrust laws (specifically Section 1 and/or 2 of the Sherman Act, prohibiting unreasonable restraints of trade and monopolization), the consequences could be profound, reshaping the sport’s economics, governance, and competitive landscape.

Remedies would be fashioned post-trial by Judge Bell, potentially including a mix of financial penalties and structural injunctions. While outcomes depend on the jury’s specific findings (e.g., the scope of harm or market definition), here are the most likely implications based on the plaintiffs’ claims and legal precedents in sports antitrust cases (like those involving MLB or the NFL):

1. Financial Penalties and Damages

– Treble Damages to Plaintiffs: The teams seek unspecified monetary damages for alleged losses in revenue, enterprise value, and investment returns, which could be tripled under antitrust law (a statutory multiplier to deter violations). Estimates suggest potential awards in the hundreds of millions, covering harms like reduced media rights shares and suppressed team valuations since at least 2020. For context, the charter system’s introduction in 2016 boosted team equity by over $1.5 billion collectively, but the plaintiffs argue NASCAR’s practices have eroded that for non-favored teams.
– Broader Cost Implications: NASCAR could face legal fees exceeding $10-20 million (already mounting), plus indirect costs like lost sponsorships or media deals if the scandal erodes fan trust. Appeals could delay payments but prolong uncertainty.

2. Injunctive Relief and Structural Changes

– Charter System Overhaul or Elimination: The court could invalidate key provisions of the charter agreement, such as the release-of-claims clause or short-term (7-14 year) durations, mandating permanent or indefinite charters with equitable revenue splits (e.g., closer to 60-70% for teams). NASCAR has warned it views charters as non-essential and could revert to an “open” system without guaranteed race spots or payouts, but a ruling might force reforms to ensure sustainability. This could benefit all 16 chartered teams by increasing their bargaining power and valuations.
– Track Divestiture and Competition Mandates: To curb monopoly power, NASCAR might be ordered to sell some of its 20 owned tracks, allowing independent venues to host rival stock-car events. The league could also be barred from prohibiting teams from using Next Gen cars in non-NASCAR series or tracks from partnering with competitors (e.g., a hypothetical ARCA or new promoter). This echoes remedies in cases like the NCAA’s athlete compensation ruling, potentially sparking a “LIV Golf-style” schism if teams defect.
– Supply and Governance Reforms: Ending single-source supplier mandates could lower costs for teams (e.g., via open bidding for parts) and foster innovation. The court might impose independent oversight, like a team veto on major decisions or revenue audits, diluting France family control.

3. Broader Industry and Market Impacts

– Positive for Teams and Stakeholders: A loss could democratize NASCAR, boosting team revenues by $50-100 million annually through fairer shares, attracting more sponsors and talent. Drivers (via their advisory council) have urged protections in any resolution, potentially leading to better contracts and fan benefits like lower ticket prices from increased competition.
– Risks to NASCAR’s Stability: Structural changes might fragment the sport by 2026, reducing event quality or viewership if teams splinter. NASCAR’s $7.7 billion media deal (through 2031) could face renegotiation if exclusivity clauses are voided, and the league might counter by acquiring more teams (as floated in internal “Project Gold Codes” plans costing $500+ million). Long-term, it could invite copycat suits from tracks or suppliers.
– Appeal and Timeline: NASCAR would likely appeal to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court, delaying implementation by 1-2 years, but bonds for damages could still apply immediately.

In summary, a violation finding would likely prioritize injunctive reforms over pure punishment, aiming to restore competition while preserving NASCAR’s viability. However, the sport’s tight-knit ecosystem—where owners like Richard Childress and Rick Hendrick warn of existential threats—makes a pre-trial settlement more probable than a full breakup. The December trial will hinge on evidence like internal NASCAR communications revealing leverage tactics, with both sides filing 19 pretrial motions to shape the battlefield.