A fresh twist has emerged in the escalating courtroom battle between 23XI Racing, Front Row Motorsports (FRM), and NASCAR, just months before the high-stakes trial is set to begin in December. The latest filings from both teams have intensified scrutiny of NASCAR’s business model and its control over the Cup Series.
What began as a challenge to the structure of the charter agreement, the system that defines how Cup teams operate, earn revenue, and secure grid spots, has now evolved into a complex legal showdown over the sport’s market power. The case is quickly becoming one of the most closely watched legal disputes in NASCAR history.
How Legal Filings Intensify Questions Over NASCAR’s Business Practices?
For months, the two teams have argued that the Cup Series exists as its own market, separate from other forms of racing such as IndyCar or Formula 1. They claimed that teams competing in it have no viable alternatives. Their attorneys also claim that NASCAR’s governance structure effectively forces teams to accept charter terms, or not compete at all.
In new court documents filed this week, 23XI Racing and FRM have requested a pre-trial ruling on a central question: how broad is NASCAR’s market, and what level of control does it hold over Cup Series teams?
The answer could redefine how the sport’s top division is viewed in legal and economic terms and whether NASCAR’s dominance crosses into antitrust territory.
“Indeed, it was because the chartered racing teams had no alternative purchaser for their services that NASCAR’s executives concluded the teams would have no choice but to accept whatever charter terms NASCAR offered or not compete at all,” reads one section of the filing.
Late Wednesday night filing from 23XI and FRM want federal judge to issue a ruling on NASCAR’s market power for race teams before the December trial.
The teams accuse NASCAR of judicial estoppel — arguing contradictory positions on the matter, https://t.co/e9F15jJzLy
— Matt Weaver (@MattWeaverRA) October 2, 2025
The latest motion asks the court to recognize that the Cup Series market is limited and exclusive, with NASCAR functioning as the only buyer of stock cars. This concept, known as monopsony power, suggests the sport’s sanctioning body has full control over the supply side of competition.
“The Court should grant partial summary judgment on the issues of relevant market and monopoly power because there is no material dispute that the input market for premier stock car racing is the relevant market or that NASCAR is the sole purchaser in that market,” the filing states.
NASCAR has long countered this argument by suggesting that teams can simply choose to compete elsewhere if dissatisfied. But 23XI Racing and FRM argue those options are irrelevant, since the Cup Series represents a unique form of racing with specialized stock cars, sponsors, and audiences that cannot be replicated elsewhere.
Read More: Michael Jordan’s 23XI Racing and Front Row Hit With Crushing Courtroom Defeat in NASCAR Charter War
The filing also points out that, in prior statements, NASCAR itself used similar language to define its own market. This allegedly aligns with the very definition the teams are now pushing before the court.
“NASCAR has thus admitted the existence of Plaintiffs’ relevant market, and partial summary judgment should be granted on the basis of this admission alone,” the teams’ lawyers argued.
By asking the court to issue a partial summary judgment before the December 1, 2025, trial, 23XI Racing and FRM hope to narrow the scope of what the jury must decide, potentially simplifying a complex case.
