
via Imago
NASHVILLE, TN – JUNE 25: Michael Jordan, co-owner of 23xi racing and NBA, Basketball Herren, USA legend watching the action on pit road during qualfying for the 2nd annual Ally 400 on June 25, 2022 at Nashville SuperSpeedway in Nashville, TN. Photo by Jeff Robinson/Icon Sportswire AUTO: JUN 25 NASCAR, Motorsport, USA Cup Series – Ally 400 Icon220625928400

via Imago
NASHVILLE, TN – JUNE 25: Michael Jordan, co-owner of 23xi racing and NBA, Basketball Herren, USA legend watching the action on pit road during qualfying for the 2nd annual Ally 400 on June 25, 2022 at Nashville SuperSpeedway in Nashville, TN. Photo by Jeff Robinson/Icon Sportswire AUTO: JUN 25 NASCAR, Motorsport, USA Cup Series – Ally 400 Icon220625928400
Lawsuits and NASCAR don’t usually share the same spotlight as photo finishes or pit-road drama. But right now, the legal battle is stealing headlines. Late tonight, NASCAR officially fired back in court against 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, who are pushing for a preliminary injunction to protect their charters. In fact, at the end of it all, if NASCAR has its way, 23XI and FRM could very well lose their spot in NASCAR.
We’re talking Michael Jordan, billion-dollar business rights, and the future makeup of the Cup Series. Well, NASCAR’s response doesn’t just poke holes in the teams’ claims. It swings back with arguments that could shape how the sport moves forward. So, what is the latest happening in the NASCAR lawsuit? Read on to find out.
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
NASCAR pushes back hard in antitrust lawsuit
NASCAR’s response to the ongoing lawsuit filed by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports signals a major standoff in the stock car world as both sides await an August 28 court hearing on the teams’ motion for a preliminary injunction.
Previously, 23XI and Front Row claimed in the lawsuit that NASCAR’s charter system is monopolistic. They argued that revoking their six collective charters would deal “irreparable harm” to their business, their team members, and their ability to compete.
They pushed for a court order to keep them as chartered teams while the larger antitrust case proceeds. The teams cited both financial and competitive dangers if their teams were demoted to open (non-guaranteed) status. NASCAR’s latest legal filing, made late in the evening, argues forcefully against any injunction.
Firstly, the sanctioning body contends there’s no immediate harm to the teams. Both 23XI and Front Row are still competing as open entries, with no drivers leaving, no “realistic risk” they’ll miss races. Most importantly, there is no direct evidence they’d lose key revenue or personnel. The judge had earlier noted that he didn’t buy that 23XI could lose Tyler Reddick as a result of losing their charter status for Dover. Why? Because they didn’t leave already.
NASCAR also 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.
According to motorsports journalist Jeff Gluck, who posted a summary of NASCAR’s legal stance on X, the sanctioning body opposes the injunction on multiple fronts.
NASCAR late tonight has filed its response opposing the preliminary injunction requested by 23XI and Front Row (hearing is Aug. 28).
NASCAR opposes it on several fronts, including:
— There’s no irreparable harm to the teams because they’re running as Open cars, no driver has…
— Jeff Gluck (@jeff_gluck) August 19, 2025
NASCAR notes through President Steve Phelps that there’s strong interest from new buyers ready to compete in the Cup Series as soon as 2026. There are several “eager potential entrants” reportedly reaching out about the disputed charters. This, they say, supports the idea that the charter system is not anti-competitive or a closed market.
“Unlike the plaintiffs, many individuals and organizations, including the interested parties referenced above, view the 2025 Charters as a good investment and want to acquire them and work with NASCAR to further grow the Cup Series,” he said. Phelps’s declaration further takes aim at 23XI principal Michael Jordan, suggesting Jordan is “trying to use litigation to grant him a permanent charter that no other team has.”
NASCAR insists its current path, selling or reallocating the six charters, would do less harm to the sport than freezing proceedings. They further argue that delays would stifle new investment and threaten competitive balance, given the new media contract and financial structure set for 2025 and beyond. With the case entering a pivotal stage ahead of the playoffs, both NASCAR and the teams are entrenched. The stakes couldn’t be higher for the future of Cup competition.
Top Stories
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
Payments up, teams included, and monopoly denied
NASCAR’s response further includes a series of pointed facts and figures aimed at dismantling accusations of anti-competitive behavior. A key highlight in the lawsuit is NASCAR’s claim that it pays its teams more than even Formula 1. This calculation is based on the “percentage of profit” metric that F1 itself uses. This is a striking assertion highlighting the financial stakes involved in NASCAR’s charter system.
NASCAR further revealed, it increased payments to teams by 62% in its latest charter agreement. They stated that it showcases their commitment to supporting team profitability amid evolving economic pressures on the sport. This counters any suggestion in the NASCAR lawsuit that the sanctioning body undervalues team investments or revenue streams.
The teams’ discovery process unearthed a text message exchanged between unnamed NASCAR executives during licensing negotiations suggesting an internal draft agreement from May 2024 “contained ‘zero wins’ for Teams.” NASCAR pushes back on this characterization. They stated that the draft actually increased payments to teams. This disputes any narrative that the league intended to cut earnings or benefits.
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
Adding to NASCAR’s case, Michael Jordan testified during his deposition that 23XI has made “reasonable profits” each year. This, naturally, weakens claims that the teams are being financially crippled by the sanctioning body’s actions. NASCAR also defends its inclusivity. They pointed out that the disputed teams are still allowed to compete in series like the zMAX CARS Tour.
NASCAR cites this as further evidence that these teams are not being excluded in a monopolistic manner. This reinforces NASCAR’s stance that the sport fosters competition and opportunity beyond just the Cup Series. Taken together, NASCAR’s response aims to establish that the league’s charter management benefits teams financially and competitively. And accusations of monopolistic control overlook the broader ecosystem NASCAR operates within.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT