The ongoing antitrust battle between NASCAR and two prominent Cup Series teams, 23XI Racing, co-owned by Michael Jordan and Denny Hamlin, and Front Row Motorsports, reached a pivotal moment this week. In an effort to maintain decorum during the contentious proceedings, attorneys for both sides filed a joint stipulation on October 27th agreeing to exclude personal attacks

Furthermore, with the submission of their trial briefs, painting a stark picture of a sport divided on its economic structure, the focus in now fixed squarely on the core business dispute over the charter system and alleged anticompetitive practices. And news keeps pouring in every day of the week ahead of the further proceedings.

Teams challenge NASCAR’s iron grip

The trial, scheduled for December 1st, will center on the teams’ allegations that the sanctioning body, NASCAR, abuses its monopolistic power. From the very first page of its brief, NASCAR struck a combative tone, arguing against the massive financial claims, “Plaintiffs will ask the jury to award them hundreds of millions of dollars in damages that they intend to keep for themselves. There is no evidence to support such an award.”

The sanctioning body emphasizes its 75-year legacy built on “hard work, investments, and innovation, not anticompetitive conduct,” and positions 23XI and FRM’s claims as attempts to recast contractual business disagreements into violations of antitrust law.

The plaintiff teams, however, presented a unified front in their own brief, arguing that their lawsuit is about securing a fair and sustainable business model for all competitors in the premier stock-car series. They leveled a damning charge against the sport’s governing body, asserting that, “Instead of treating the racing teams as valued business partners, NASCAR has exploited its monopoly power to deprive them of a fair opportunity to make a reasonable return on their substantial investments.”

The teams argue that NASCAR’s control over sanctioning and track agreements has created an effective stranglehold on the market. They cite alarming figures: “75% of teams lost money in 2024” and point to the sanctions agreements from 2023 and 2024 that prohibited competitive stock-car series at NASCAR’s partner tracks through 2026. The teams claim this left them without alternatives during a crucial period when NASCAR was negotiating its next television deal for 2025-31.

The pretrial filings reveal a strategic tug-of-war over what the jury will actually be allowed to hear. NASCAR’s motions seek to limit the arguments by 23XI and FRM that could imply broader industry support or cast the sanctioning body in an emotional light. Among its requests: to block the teams from saying they represent the interests of other organizations, to bar expert speculation about hypothetical markets, and to prevent mention of NASCAR’s prior mergers and acquisitions, such as ARCA or ISC.

NASCAR also wants to exclude the term “collective bargaining” from the trial, arguing that it falsely implies teams have union-like rights. On the other side, the plaintiffs’ pretrial motions aim to curb what they describe as NASCAR’s attempts to distract the jury with irrelevant attacks. Their filings seek to prevent NASCAR from introducing inflammatory documents, delving into the personal finances or charitable donations of team owners, or discussing the sport’s long history before 2014.

They also want NASCAR barred from claiming that teams received charters “for free,” arguing that those charters required continuous investment and granted NASCAR valuable intellectual property rights. In a particularly telling motion, 23XI and FRM ask the court to prohibit NASCAR from framing competition as “undesirable,” a stance they say reveals the very monopolistic behavior at issue.

The high stakes of this litigation cast a significant shadow over the sport’s immediate future. While NASCAR characterizes the teams as simply frustrated car owners seeking an outsized windfall, the teams, represented by high-profile sports attorney Jeffrey Kessler, are demanding a restructuring that they believe is necessary for the betterment of the sport, as Jordan vowed. However, recently, Hamlin admitted that the legal standoff might just be a ‘suicide mission’ for one side.

Denny Hamlin opens up on failed settlement talks behind the doors

There was a flicker of optimism that October’s round of mediation might finally crack the stalemate between the two teams and NASCAR, especially after earlier efforts fizzled in New York under mediatory Jeffrey Mishkin. This time, Judge Kenneth Bell himself presided over the talks in his courtroom, hoping his oversight could bridge the gap. But after two long days of negotiations, the October 21 settlement conference ended without a resolution, making it another failed attempt at peace before December’s trial.

When the dust settled, Denny Hamlin didn’t sugarcoat his frustration. The 23XI co-owner told The Athletic‘s Jordan Bianchi, “It was OK the first day, not great the second day. Didn’t end in any resolution, unfortunately. … Both sides probably feel strongly about their case. I think one of us is on a suicide mission.” The remark echoed the hardened positions on both ends, with NASCAR urging dismissal of the case and the teams pushing for a summary judgment instead of leaving it to a jury.

Judge Bell, meanwhile, has been careful not to issue early rulings that could influence jurors ahead of the December 1 trial. Thursday’s 3.5-hour hearing wrapped without a verdict, though the judge praised both sides for their “good-faith attempt to settle.” He set November 12 for hearings on pretrial motions and expert testimony, a final checkpoint before the courtroom battle that could redefine the balance of power in NASCAR.