NASCAR appeared in federal court on Wednesday, seeking the dismissal of an antitrust lawsuit filed against the organization by two racing teams: 23XI Racing, co-owned by NBA legend Michael Jordan, and Front Row Motorsports, owned by entrepreneur Bob Jenkins. The suit, which challenges NASCAR’s charter system, alleges monopolistic practices and inequitable revenue distribution.
During the 90-minute hearing, NASCAR’s attorneys argued for the case’s dismissal and requested the court require the teams to post a bond equivalent to charter payouts. NASCAR attorney Christopher Yates asserted that the claims lacked merit and sought to protect the current system’s financial integrity. U.S. District Judge Kenneth Bell, however, signaled his inclination to let the case proceed, stating, “This case is going to be tried this year, and it deserves to be tried this year.”
The legal battle stems from NASCAR’s franchise-like charter system introduced in 2016. This system guarantees 36 chartered cars a spot in every race, with financial incentives tied to performance, while four additional spots are open to non-chartered teams. In 2023, NASCAR renegotiated charter agreements, presenting a take-it-or-leave-it offer. While 13 teams signed, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports refused, arguing the terms were unfair and failed to provide teams with a fair share of revenues.
The teams allege that NASCAR, as the sole stock car racing entity in the U.S., exploits its monopoly to limit competition and restrict financial transparency. They argue the current structure disproportionately benefits the organization while constraining teams’ opportunities for financial growth.
Earlier court rulings granted the two teams charter status for the 2025 season under a preliminary injunction. Judge Bell overturned a prior decision that denied this request, citing potential irreparable harm to the teams without charter recognition. NASCAR, in response, asked the court to mandate a bond from the teams as collateral for the payouts, should they lose the case.
In court, Judge Bell questioned NASCAR’s reliance on the charter system, asking, “Why give a charter to anyone?” NASCAR’s attorney responded that the sport could operate without the charter model if necessary. Jeffrey Kessler, a prominent antitrust lawyer representing the teams, countered that NASCAR’s approach unfairly consolidates power and fails to offer equitable revenue sharing.
As arguments unfolded, both sides addressed the broader implications of the case. Yates accused the teams of using the Race Team Alliance, a collective bargaining group, as a “cartel” to push for better terms. Kessler dismissed this claim, emphasizing the teams’ pursuit of fairness.
The courtroom saw notable absences, with neither Michael Jordan nor Bob Jenkins attending. However, 23XI co-owner Denny Hamlin, accompanied by his family, was present, as were NASCAR Chairman Jim France and Vice Chairman Mike Helton. Judge Bell expressed his commitment to an efficient resolution, promising to oversee discovery motions and expedite the process.
The case, set for trial in December, could have far-reaching implications for NASCAR’s business model and the balance of power between the organization and its teams. With Judge Bell expected to rule soon on the motion to dismiss and the bond request, the sport’s stakeholders await a decision that may redefine professional stock car racing.
