23XI, Front Row Refine Antitrust Claims Against NASCAR, Focusing on Monopolization Allegations

CHARLOTTE, N.C. – In a significant strategic shift ahead of a looming December 1, 2025, trial, NASCAR Cup Series teams 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports have voluntarily dismissed the Section 1 antitrust claims from their lawsuit against the racing sanctioning body. This decision streamlines the legal battle, allowing the focus to sharpen exclusively on allegations of monopolization under Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

The move follows a series of favorable rulings for the teams from a Charlotte federal judge. Earlier, the court had ruled in favor of 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports regarding the market definition within the lawsuit. This was preceded by the dismissal of counterclaims filed by NASCAR against the two teams.

The Sherman Antitrust Act, a cornerstone of U.S. competition law, is divided into sections that address different facets of anticompetitive behavior. Section 1, which has now been withdrawn by the plaintiffs, prohibits agreements between two or more parties that unreasonably restrain trade. Historically, this section has been applied to cases involving price-fixing, bid-rigging, and other collusive practices. In the context of this lawsuit, the Section 1 claim would have addressed alleged anticompetitive conduct stemming from the merger of NASCAR and International Speedway Corporation (ISC).

Conversely, Section 2 of the Act targets a single entity’s actions that constitute monopolization, or attempts or conspiracies to monopolize a relevant market. This section is concerned with whether a dominant company, in this instance NASCAR, has abused its market power through exclusionary or anticompetitive practices to maintain or expand its monopoly.

Related News :

The plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss, filed in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2), explicitly states the intent to streamline issues for trial. “Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2), and in order to streamline the issues for trial, Plaintiffs 2311 Racing LLC d/b/a/ 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, Inc. move the Court for an order voluntarily dismissing, with prejudice, Count Two of their Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 107) (the ‘Section 1 claim’), asserted against all Defendants,” the filing reads. “Plaintiffs are voluntarily dismissing their Section 1 claim so that the upcoming December 1, 2025, trial can focus on Plaintiffs’ Section 2 monopolization claim.”

This judicial refinement means the upcoming trial will solely adjudicate whether NASCAR has engaged in monopolistic practices. The original complaint, filed by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, detailed a series of allegations against NASCAR. While the specifics of the remaining Section 2 claims were not fully elaborated upon in the provided excerpt, they are understood to stem from the initial filing and will now form the crux of the legal dispute.

The lawsuit, initially filed in December 2023, alleges that NASCAR’s business practices have created an anticompetitive environment that harms independent team owners. 23XI Racing, co-owned by basketball legend Michael Jordan and three-time Daytona 500 winner Denny Hamlin, and Front Row Motorsports, led by Bob Jenkins, contend that NASCAR’s control over various aspects of the sport, including race scheduling, media rights, and the charter system, has stifled competition and limited their ability to operate profitably and independently.

The charter system, introduced in 2016, guarantees teams a starting spot in every Cup Series race and a share of the sport’s revenue. However, the lawsuit has suggested that the terms and conditions of these charters, along with NASCAR’s overall management of the sport, disproportionately benefit incumbent teams and the sanctioning body itself, thereby creating barriers to entry and expansion for others.

The dismissal of the Section 1 claims does not inherently validate NASCAR’s position but rather narrows the scope of the legal contest. It suggests that the plaintiffs believe their strongest case lies in proving NASCAR’s unilateral anticompetitive conduct rather than proving a conspiracy or agreement to restrain trade.

NASCAR, in its defense, has consistently maintained that its business model is designed to promote the sport and ensure its long-term health and competitiveness. The sanctioning body argues that its actions are in line with industry norms and are essential for the sustainability of NASCAR.

The impending trial is anticipated to involve extensive testimony from key figures within NASCAR and its affiliated teams. Notably, prominent team owners such as Rick Hendrick of Hendrick Motorsports and Roger Penske of Team Penske are expected to be deposed. These depositions, occurring before the trial, will provide critical insights into the inner workings of the sport and the perspectives of its most influential stakeholders. Hendrick Motorsports, a dominant force in NASCAR for decades, and Team Penske, with its rich history of success across multiple motorsports disciplines, operate some of the most prominent and successful teams in the Cup Series, making their owners’ testimonies particularly relevant to the antitrust claims.

The legal proceedings are unfolding against a backdrop of significant financial investment and operational complexity within NASCAR. Team revenues are heavily influenced by sponsorship deals, media rights payouts, and prize money, all of which are, to varying degrees, controlled or influenced by NASCAR’s policies. The charter system, while providing stability, has also been a point of contention, with discussions about its future and potential modifications ongoing within the industry.

The outcome of this Section 2 monopolization claim could have far-reaching implications for the future structure and governance of NASCAR. A ruling in favor of 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports could potentially lead to mandated changes in NASCAR’s business practices, including its approach to the charter system, revenue distribution, and overall market control. Conversely, a victory for NASCAR would likely solidify its current operational framework and business model.

The legal teams for both sides are expected to present detailed economic analyses and evidence to support their arguments regarding market definition, market power, and the alleged anticompetitive effects of NASCAR’s conduct. The complexity of antitrust law, particularly in the context of professional sports leagues, often requires expert testimony to interpret market dynamics and the impact of business practices.

As the December 1, 2025, trial date approaches, the focus remains squarely on the monopolization aspect of the lawsuit. This strategic refinement by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports signals a determined effort to present a clear and focused case against NASCAR, aiming to demonstrate that the sanctioning body has unlawfully leveraged its market dominance to the detriment of its competitors. The racing world will be watching closely as this high-stakes legal battle unfolds, with the potential to reshape the landscape of American stock car racing.