In a stunning escalation of the ongoing legal battle between NASCAR and two of its prominent teams, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, new evidence has surfaced that has sent shockwaves through the motorsport world. The antitrust lawsuit, initiated in October 2024 by the teams co-owned by NBA legend Michael Jordan and driver Denny Hamlin, accuses NASCAR of monopolistic practices that unfairly bind teams to its series, tracks, and suppliers. Now, NASCAR has fired back with explosive allegations, intensifying the controversy surrounding the charter system that guarantees teams race entry and revenue.
The heart of the dispute lies in the 2025 Charter Agreement, which 13 of 15 NASCAR Cup Series teams signed under pressure in September 2024. 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports refused, citing unfair terms, including a clause prohibiting antitrust lawsuits against NASCAR. The teams argued that NASCAR’s control over racetracks, parts suppliers, and exclusivity deals stifles competition, leaving them no viable alternative to race premier stock cars. After a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction in December 2024, allowing the teams to race as chartered teams in 2025, NASCAR appealed, claiming the ruling was riddled with errors.
Recently uncovered evidence has added fuel to the fire. NASCAR’s latest court filings allege that Curtis Polk, a co-owner of 23XI Racing and Jordan’s longtime business manager, orchestrated a coordinated effort to pressure NASCAR into better charter terms. According to NASCAR, Polk devised strategies involving potential boycotts of events, negative media campaigns to disrupt media rights negotiations, and coercion of other team owners to resist NASCAR’s governance. These allegations, detailed in a March 2025 counterclaim, paint 23XI Racing as the aggressor, accusing the team of violating antitrust laws through “anticompetitive collective conduct.” NASCAR’s legal team argues that the teams’ refusal to sign the charter agreement does not justify their lawsuit, as dissatisfaction with contract terms does not constitute an antitrust violation.
The controversy deepened when 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports responded, dismissing NASCAR’s counterclaim as a “desperate” attempt to distract from its own monopolistic practices. In a May 2025 filing, the teams urged a judge to dismiss NASCAR’s allegations, arguing that they lack factual grounding and are retaliatory in nature. They pointed to NASCAR’s initial approval of charter transfers from Stewart-Haas Racing, which was later rescinded after the lawsuit was filed, as evidence of punitive behavior. The teams also highlighted the financial stakes, with 23XI Racing facing a potential $49 billion risk due to sponsor uncertainty and driver contracts, including star Tyler Reddick’s threat to leave if charter status was not secured.
As the legal saga unfolds, the courtroom drama has taken center stage. A May 9, 2025, appeals court hearing saw judges question whether 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports could both race as chartered teams and sue NASCAR, suggesting the teams might need to choose between charter benefits and pursuing damages as non-chartered “open” teams. NASCAR’s push to amend its counterclaim with additional allegations of collusion has further complicated the case, with the teams arguing it’s a weak attempt to intimidate other teams from supporting their challenge.
With the 2025 NASCAR season underway, the lawsuit’s outcome remains uncertain. The teams continue to race, bolstered by the injunction, but the appeals court’s impending decision could upend their charter status. For fans, drivers, and sponsors, the controversy underscores deep tensions within NASCAR’s business model. As 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports fight for a fairer system, the sport stands at a crossroads, with the potential to reshape its competitive landscape for years to come.
