NASCAR on Friday motioned for summary judgment in its litigation against 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, with the racing association arguing that pretrial discovery has undermined core features of the two teams’ antitrust case.
U.S. District Judge Kenneth D. Bell is unlikely to grant summary judgment—to either side—as it would require him to conclude there is no genuine dispute of material fact and thus a trial is unnecessary. The two sides have spared no billable hour in raising many and often substantive disputes regarding key pieces of information about competition in the marketplace and other core features for antitrust review. It is more likely the case continues to proceed toward a trial that is currently scheduled to begin on Dec. 1.
But NASCAR’s filing offers its most detailed rebuttal yet and previews the types of arguments that would be raised in a trial. Authored by Christopher S. Yates and other attorneys from Latham & Watkins and Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, NASCAR cites sworn testimony by other teams’ owners to assert that NASCAR’s charter system and related business enterprises are popular with fans and have generated enormous wealth for owners, drivers and others connected to the sport. Testimony by other owners is key in that if they want to protect a model they regard as beneficial, NASCAR can argue that dismantling its system would cause more harm than good to competition.
23XI and Front Row Motorsports sued NASCAR and CEO Jim France last year, accusing them of using monopoly power to suppress competition in ways that limit economic opportunities for premier stock car racing. NASCAR is depicted as buying up other circuits and racetracks and negotiating non-compete restrictions to ensure that “no other motorsport series” approaches NASCAR’s “broadcast ratings, live gate attendance, rights fees, or corporate sponsorship revenue.”
Central to the lawsuit is NASCAR’s system of charters. This system guarantees teams a starting position in NASCAR-sanctioned races while restricting their capacity to compete in other circuits and requiring both NASCAR and teams to waive potential legal claims. 23XI and Front Row contend charters undermine competition and have empowered NASCAR to control stock car racing in ways that cost teams, owners and drivers potential financial rewards and other avenues for competition.
NASCAR tells a completely different story. It maintains that 23XI and Front Row are outliers or mavericks attempting to use antitrust litigation to renegotiate charter terms that other teams not only accepted but negotiated and welcomed. NASCAR also asserts that the charter system was made at the request of teams, and the 2025 charter has been signed by 13 of the 15 race teams.
23XI and Front Row refused to sign a charter but sought—and ultimately failed to obtain—a preliminary injunction that would have granted the benefits of the charter without having to waive claims against NASCAR.
NASCAR maintains the charter system has meant charter teams receive about half of media revenues and that the combined charter holder equity value has jumped by more than $1.5 billion since 2016.
NASCAR has also countersued Front Row, 23XI and Curtis Polk—who co-owns 23XI Racing with Michael Jordan and Denny Hamlin. NASCAR accuses them of operating an illegal cartel, threatening group boycotts, coercing other teams’ owners and interfering with media partner negotiations.
According to the declarations of team owners and independent track owners NASCAR filed as litigation exhibits, there is widespread support for maintaining the charter system and a shared belief it has provided substantial value. As NASCAR tells it, the industry generally sees charters as enhancing, not harming, the sport. It says litigation against charters could diminish teams’ potential earnings.
The filing includes a declaration by Rick Hendrick III, the majority owner of Hendrick Motorsports. He praised the France family for investing “significant time, effort and [money]” into the growth of NASCAR. Hendrick also described the charter system as “critical to the stability of the NASCAR ecosystem,” including for teams and “the businesses that support us and NASCAR itself.” He warned that “without this framework in place,” the “long-term viability of the teams” would come into question.
Roger Penske, founder and chairman of the Penske Corporation, submitted a declaration saying he believes “the Charter system has been beneficial because it delivered on the race teams’ goal of creating long-term equity value.”
Striking a similar chord, Joe Gibbs of Joe Gibbs Racing and former head coach of the NFL’s Washington franchise, stressed the charter system should be preserved to ensure “the long-term viability of our incredible sport.”
NASCAR’s motion contains many other arguments, including that the statute of limitations for antitrust claims is four years. Parts of 23XI and Front Row’s case relies on developments that occurred prior to October 2020, which is four years before the lawsuit was filed.
23XI and Front Row will file a motion opposing NASCAR’s arguments. The teams are represented by Jeffrey Kessler and other attorneys from Winston & Strawn.
In a statement shared with Sportico late Friday, Kessler said the declarations offered by NASCAR are “supportive” and not contrary to his clients’ position. Kessler wrote that his clients do not seek to eliminate the charter system, and they recognize “teams cannot survive without” charters. He also opined the declarations do not “excuse NASCAR’s anticompetitive conduct or its unlawful monopoly, points 23XI and Front Row have maintained from the start.”
While the two sides have intensely debated the case, it remains possible that they’ll strike a deal before the trial starts. A settlement would end the litigation and likely change some aspects of the relationship between charters and teams.
This story has been updated in the penultimate paragraph to include a statement from Jeffrey Kessler.
Penske Motorsports is owned by Roger Penske and is not related to Penske Media, the parent company of Sportico.
