NASCAR Issues Bluntly-Worded Rebuttal to 23XI, FRM Injunction Request
For the last seven weeks – running directly alongside the NASCAR Cup Series Playoffs – the biggest off-track storyline in several years has been playing out, in the form of an antitrust lawsuit filed against NASCAR by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports.
The entire lawsuit stems from the 2025 NASCAR Cup Series Charter Agreement, which after more than two years of negotiations between the teams and NASCAR resulted in a take-it-or-leave-it offer from the sanctioning body, prior to the playoff-opener at Atlanta.
23XI Racing (owned by NBA superstar Michael Jordan and NASCAR Cup Series driver Denny Hamlin) and Front Row Motorsports (owned by businessman Bob Jenkins) were the only two organizations that didn’t sign that final offer.
Earlier this month (October 9), 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports filed a preliminary injunction as part of its anti-trust lawsuit against NASCAR, which if awarded, would allow both teams to continue as chartered entries in the NASCAR Cup Series for 2025. The teams also filed a motion for expedited discovery, asking the courts to give the team’s legal counsel access to various documents and files from key NASCAR executives.
In an October 23 court filing, NASCAR bluntly says that the injunction request is “an attempt to force NASCAR into a contract on Plaintiffs’ preferred terms” and that it “falls short of meeting the demanding standard required for obtaining a mandatory injunction”.
“The Motion seeks to change the status quo, not maintain it; is about money, not irreparable harm; and fails to show a likelihood of success on the merits. This lawsuit is not about protecting competition; it’s a bid by Plaintiffs to secure more money than they could through arm’s-length negotiations. The Motion should be denied,” the filing reads.
NASCAR’s rebuttal to the injunction filing from 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports stands on four key pillars: there are no extraordinary circumstances, demanding a 2025 charter contradicts their complaint, the damage is far from irreparable, but rather self-inflicted, and that antitrust complaints are unlikely to succeed on merit.
In this filing, NASCAR says the motion is “a masterclass in contradiction” in the way that both teams denounced the 2025 Charter Agreement and referred to it as anti-competitive but are now asking the courts to intervene so that NASCAR is forced to provide them with a Charter (and all its benefits).
NASCAR says the Plaintiffs are asking the court to excise Section 10.3, which provides NASCAR with a release from Charter teams, but ignore Section 10.4, where NASCAR reciprocally releases claims. According to NASCAR, the teams agreed to that same release when acquiring charter and never objected during the ongoing negotiations.
“These contradictions expose Plaintiffs’ motive: to use this Court to extract more money and better contractual terms from NASCAR,” the sanctioning body added in a filing.
In its rebuttal to 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports' injunction, NASCAR cites several instances of cooperation with race teams, including decades of investment from the France family, and outlines much of the negotiating process in reaching the 2025 Charter Agreement.
While working alongside the Race Team Alliance (RTA), NASCAR introduced the Charter system in 2016, which awarded a total of 36 Charters, without charge, to organizations that had shown a long-term commitment to NASCAR.
"To create a compelling product for fans, broadcasters, and sponsors, the 2016 Charter included mututal promises," the filing from NASCAR reads. "NASCAR limited the number of Charters and guaranteed Charter members positions at each race and certain payments, while Charter teams agreed not to race for other stock-car racing leagues. Teams without a charter could still race as 'open teams' as all teams did before 2016."
During the negotiation process, NASCAR claims they made major successions, including increased media revenue for Charter teams (exact figures were blacked out due to an approved call for confidentiality). The sanctioning body also offered a longer term but declined to turn charters permanent.
NASCAR claims that once that happened, the teams collectively boycotted the Team Owner Council meeting in April 2024. From that point forward, the sanctioning body continued discussions with individual teams and their lawyers. The new agreement matches NASCAR's broadcast agreement; seven years with a possible extension.
A take-it-or-leave-it offer was provided on August 30, 2024. Thirteen organizations, representing 32 charters, signed the agreement, while 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports chose not to, despite being given additional time. In recent weeks, NASCAR has stated that it is prepared to contest the 2025 NASCAR Cup Series campaign with only 32 Chartered Entries, and eight open entries, making adjustments where necessary to accommodate.
23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports currently field two Chartered Entries in the NASCAR Cup Series, but have entered agreements to purchase a third from the soon-to-close Stewart-Haas Racing. NASCAR says neither team has submitted a transfer request.
The injunction hearing will officially take place on November 4, 2024, less than one week before the NASCAR Cup Series season-finale at Phoenix Raceway. After a verdict is reached, the 2025 NASCAR Cup Series picture will become slightly clearer.
Wrapping up their rebuttal, NASCAR in a court filing says: "Plaintiffs' requested relief would cause real harm to NASCAR and the 32 Charter holders. Teams must budget for next season, and NASCAR needs to calculate and communicate to teams the prize money available for each race. NASCAR cannot simply reissue 2025 Charters without affecting Charter teams and other stakeholders, especially since Plaintiff's refusal to sign the 2025 Charters increased prize amounts for Charter and open teams alike."
"Moreover, forcing NASCAR into an unwanted contract goes against the public interest."
