NASCAR’s countersuit against 23XI and FRM is mere ‘gamesmanship,’ race teams say
The two Cup Series teams that sued NASCAR in October for being a monopoly got on the attack again on Wednesday — this time, though, as a case’s defendants.
The teams made clear that they consider NASCAR’s countersuit — in response to a federal antitrust lawsuit in October calling NASCAR a monopoly — “retaliatory” and “an act of desperation.”
The countersuit at issue states that the teams in question — 23XI Racing (owned by Michael Jordan and racing superstar Denny Hamlin) and Front Row Motorsports (owned by Bob Jenkins) — acted as an “illegal cartel” that tried to unlawfully manipulate charter negotiations.
The two race teams wrote Wednesday that NASCAR’s countersuit should be dismissed on the simple grounds that “it does not allege the facts necessary to state a claim.”
More specifically, according to Wednesday’s court filing:
“NASCAR is using the counterclaim to engage in litigation gamesmanship, with the transparent objective of intimidating the other racing teams by threatening them with severe consequences if they support plaintiffs’ challenge to the unlawful NASCAR monopoly.”
And:
“The counterclaim allegations instead show each racing team individually determining whether or not to agree to NASCAR’s demands through individual negotiations — the opposite of a conspiracy.”
To fully understand the saga, you’ll have to tread back to September. That’s when NASCAR put forth an updated charter agreement and asked teams to sign onto it. The charter agreement, updated from the original deal brokered in 2016, allows teams to operate like franchises; each Cup team with a charter has guaranteed entry into every race and earn a portion of each race’s purse.
Thirteen of the 15 Cup Series teams signed the charter deal NASCAR put in front of them in September. The two who didn’t — 23XI and Front Row Motorsports — subsequently sued NASCAR in a Charlotte court in October, stating that the sanctioning body of NASCAR was a monopoly. The two teams backed this monopoly claim with the rationale that NASCAR operates without transparency, that it owns the majority of racetracks NASCAR chooses to run on, that it prevents teams from competing in other stock car races, and that it forces teams to purchase car parts from third-party suppliers of NASCAR’s choosing, among other reasons stated in the original lawsuit.
A lot has happened since October.
Among the developments in the lawsuit:
▪ The teams filed a motion for a preliminary injunction immediately after filing the lawsuit to allow them to race in 2025 as chartered teams while litigation proceeds. The teams claim that the charter is an economic necessity for competing.
▪ NASCAR then responded by stating that those two teams didn’t deserve the benefit of running as a chartered team considering they didn’t sign the agreement.
▪ In December, a judge granted the teams’ request for their preliminary injunction, allowing 23XI and FRM to compete as chartered cars while the lawsuit unfolds.
▪ In January, NASCAR’s motion to dismiss the case altogether was denied, and a jury trial date was set for Dec. 1.
▪ Then in February, during the week of the Daytona 500, NASCAR filed its appeal brief to the injunction that allowed 23XI and Front Row to operate as charter teams while suing NASCAR for antitrust violations.
▪ NASCAR wasn’t done. Earlier this month, NASCAR filed the counterclaims that during the negotiations for a new charter agreement, 23XI co-owner Curtis Polk and the 23XI and FRM teams conspired to use tactics that violated antitrust law — hence the aforementioned “illegal cartel” monicker.
▪ Since then, the two teams have fired back by responding to NASCAR’s litigation moves. The teams, first, called NASCAR’s appeal to the injunction that the race teams shouldn’t be able to compete with charters while litigation ensues “meritless.” And then the two teams responded to NASCAR’s counterclaims Wednesday, asserting that the counter-lawsuit should be dismissed.
Instead of responding to the claims through a spokesperson, NASCAR referred The Charlotte Observer to comments made by Chris Yates, the sanctioning body’s lawyer, earlier this month after the counterclaims were filed. Yates contended that the two teams have been trying to use these legal proceedings as a business negotiation tactic — but that such a plan won’t work.
“Although NASCAR recognizes the value charters have brought to teams and is certainly willing to continue with the model with the terms mutually agreed upon by NASCAR and 32 charter holders,” Yates said, “NASCAR now finds itself in the ironic position to defend a model that NASCAR never asked for in the first place.”
An appeals hearing to determine if 23XI and FRM can continue racing under the current charter agreement will take place in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and is scheduled for May 9. A jury trial for the lawsuit, which will also consider NASCAR’s counterclaims, is set for December.
This story was originally published March 27, 2025 at 5:00 AM with the headline "NASCAR’s countersuit against 23XI and FRM is mere ‘gamesmanship,’ race teams say."
