23XI Racing And FRM Retaliate After NASCAR Injunction Verdict

23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports have filed a response in their ongoing antitrust lawsuit against NASCAR, particularly the part revolving around a preliminary injunction related to the 2025 Charter Agreements. The two racing teams have requested this injunction to enable them to enter into these agreements without relinquishing their antitrust claims against NASCAR, hoping to maintain their operations without what they deem as undue restrictions.

The teams contend that this legal measure would allow all parties to revert to an “uncontested status,” essentially ensuring that operations could continue as they have in recent years.

NASCAR, however, vehemently denies the allegations and opposes the injunction. The sanctioning body contends that granting the injunction would disrupt planned operations for the 2025 season, particularly the arrangement involving 32 chartered teams. NASCAR argues that the request is merely an attempt by the teams to extract more favorable financial concessions.

Furthermore, they assert that even without a charter, teams can still compete as “open” teams. NASCAR believes any financial harm to 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports can be adequately compensated should the teams prevail in court.

The counterarguments from 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, led by their counsel Jeffrey Kessler, focus on a lack of legal precedent cited by NASCAR in their opposition.

The preliminary statement in the new filing states:

“Defendants [NASCAR] do not dispute that NASCAR’s Cup Series is the only premier stock car racing series in which Plaintiffs [23XI Racing and FRM] can race. This means they have monopoly power.

“Defendants do not dispute that they use restrictive covenants denying competitors access to racetracks and racing teams—and their economist has not offered any procompetitive justification for such restrictions or for NASCAR’s acquisitions of racetracks and a competitor.

“This means that Defendants have used exclusionary acts—not legitimate competition—to maintain their monopoly. And Defendants do not dispute that the Charter Agreement requires Plaintiffs to agree to a release of claims in order to be able to compete. Defendants argue that Plaintiffs can compete as ‘open’ teams to avoid irreparable injury.

“But what Defendants do not tell the Court is that they mandate the same release of claims as the ‘price’ for competing ‘open.’ Unless a preliminary injunction is granted, Plaintiffs will suffer the indisputable irreparable harm of being unable to compete without risking forfeiting their antitrust claims.

“‘Might’ does not make ‘right’ under the antitrust laws.”

23XI Racing, founded in 2020 by NBA legend Michael Jordan, three-time Daytona 500 winner Denny Hamlin, and Curtis Polk, entered the NASCAR Cup Series with a strong vision for fair competition. Notably, driver Bubba Wallace achieved a historic victory in 2021, becoming the second African American to win in the Cup Series. The team has since expanded to a two-car operation and is currently celebrating great success with Wallace’s teammate Tyler Reddick who has secured a spot in Championship 4.

Similarly, Front Row Motorsports, owned by Bob Jenkins, has been a steadfast presence in NASCAR since 2005. With nearly two decades of experience, Jenkins has witnessed the sport’s evolution and remains an advocate for fairness and transparency.

The allegations within the antitrust lawsuit are serious. According to 23XI Racing and FRM, NASCAR and its CEO, Jim France, have been engaged in anti-competitive practices. These reportedly include acquiring most premier racetracks, imposing exclusivity deals, preventing teams from participating in other races, and controlling Next Gen parts and cars. The lawsuit also challenges the terms of the 2025 Charter Agreements, which the teams described as unfair after unsuccessful negotiations spanning two years.

The preliminary injunction hearing is set for Monday 4 November.