NASCAR’s legal battle with 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports (FRM) just got uglier. Days before a critical appeal hearing, the teams blasted NASCAR’s latest filings as “overblown rhetoric and hyperbole,” escalating a feud threatening to upend the sport’s economic foundation.
At stake? The charter system that guarantees teams entry into races — and a fight over who controls NASCAR’s future.
23XI and FRM Dismiss NASCAR’s Countersuit as ‘Meritless’
In a scathing 75-page response filed March 14, 23XI and FRM dismantled NASCAR’s appeal of a December injunction allowing them to compete as chartered teams in 2025. The teams accused NASCAR of misrepresenting antitrust law and doubling down on “baseless” claims.
“Each of defendants’ arguments against this narrow injunction is meritless,” the filing stated. The document defended a federal judge’s ruling that barred NASCAR from forcing teams to sign liability waivers, a clause the court called an illegal shield against antitrust scrutiny.
NASCAR’s countersuit, filed March 5, alleges the teams formed an “illegal cartel” to extort better charter terms. It singled out 23XI co-owner Curtis Polk, claiming that the teams “willfully violated the antitrust laws by orchestrating anticompetitive collective conduct in connection with the terms of the 2025 Charter Agreements.” But 23XI and FRM fired back, arguing NASCAR’s narrative ignores reality.
“The only thing ‘paradoxical’ is the defendants’ objection that the preliminary injunction should be vacated because it is too narrow because it does not enjoin the covenant not to compete that the complaint alleges is an unlawful exclusionary act,” the response read. Attorney Jeffrey Kessler slammed NASCAR’s move, saying that the “Counterclaim by NASCAR is a meritless distraction and a desperate attempt to shift attention away from its own unlawful, monopolistic actions.”
How Driver Contracts and Sponsors Fueled the Legal Firestorm
The teams revealed high-stakes fallout if charters were revoked. Driver Tyler Reddick has it in his agreement clause to leave 23XI unless guaranteed a chartered ride by Dec. 18. Bubba Wallace and Corey Heim demanded immediate answers, while sponsors slashed deals over fears of missing the Daytona 500.
23XI/FRM (plaintiffs) on whether they would likely succeed on the merits of the case: "Plaintiffs needed to–and did–show only that they will likely be able to prove that they are suffering antitrust injury by receiving below-competitive market prices for selling their services" https://t.co/eL5H7OpH2R
— Bob Pockrass (@bobpockrass) March 14, 2025
“If you don’t qualify or are not allowed to race in the Daytona 500, it will be a breach of our agreement,” one sponsor warned FRM. The teams argued these risks justified the injunction, a claim NASCAR called “speculative.”
But the battle runs deeper than contracts. 23XI and FRM accused NASCAR of monopolizing premier stock car racing by controlling tracks, stifling competition, and forcing teams to use pricey “Next Gen” cars. They likened NASCAR’s tactics to a “dictatorship,” echoing Michael Jordan’s October 2024 critique: “The way NASCAR is run today is unfair to everyone.”
NASCAR attorney Christopher Yates dismissed Polk’s approach as misguided. “I don’t think Mr. Polk really understands the sport,” Yates told The Associated Press.
Yet, with a May 9 appeals hearing looming, neither side is backing down. The outcome could redefine NASCAR’s power structure or fracture it entirely. For fans, the message is clear: Buckle up; this legal duel is miles from the checkered flag.