CHARLOTTE, N.C. — A federal jury trial starts Monday over Michael Jordan’s dispute with NASCAR, a case that could alter the sport’s financial model and governance.
The lawsuit was filed by 23XI Racing — co-owned by Jordan, three-time Daytona 500 winner Denny Hamlin and business manager Curtis Polk — and Front Row Motorsports, owned by Bob Jenkins. Their teams were the only two of 15 on the Cup circuit that refused to sign NASCAR’s proposed 2025 charter renewals after more than two years of negotiations over revenue sharing, governance and whether charters should be permanent.
The central dispute concerns NASCAR’s charter system, created in 2016 to operate like a franchise: a charter guarantees a team a spot in the 40-car field for all 38 points races and a defined share of purse distributions. 23XI and Front Row say the 2025 terms failed to give teams the permanence, bigger revenue shares and governance input they sought. They accuse NASCAR of monopolistic conduct through exclusivity clauses, ownership of multiple tracks on the schedule and centralized control of rules and competition.
The plaintiffs are seeking substantial monetary relief to cover legal fees and what they describe as lost revenue after competing this season as “open” teams. As non-chartered entrants, they were eligible to qualify for one of four open starting spots and did get into races with a combined six cars, but they say doing so cost them millions in purse money.
NASCAR, long led by the France family, denies antitrust violations, saying its business practices are customary, pointing to increased payouts in the 2025 charter agreement and noting that open-entry teams are permitted to race. NASCAR’s filings also emphasize the series’ financial strength — pretrial discovery showed the sport generated more than $100 million in 2024.
Pretrial discovery has unearthed a string of contentious internal communications that have become public. Team owners and NASCAR executives traded barbed comments in emails and notes, including messages attributed to Commissioner Steve Phelps that insulted veteran owner Richard Childress. Some documents also discussed efforts to undermine competing series, such as Tony Stewart’s SRX.
The plaintiffs’ camp has not emerged unscathed. A 23XI executive was recorded saying NASCAR chairman Jim France “had to die” to obtain favorable charter terms, Hamlin acknowledged personal animus toward the France family, an adviser to Jordan questioned Hamlin’s business judgment, and Jordan made a quip about gambling losses relative to payments to a driver.
A further point of contention is who will testify. NASCAR has sought depositions or testimony from major owners Rick Hendrick and Roger Penske, who submitted declarations backing the charter model and have asked not to be deposed; they have also requested any testimony be confined to charter-related matters. NASCAR has asked the court to prevent some plaintiffs from sitting in the courtroom during trial, a move observers view as aimed at limiting potential influence from high-profile figures such as Jordan and Hamlin.
Hamlin signaled he will be outspoken at trial. On social media he wrote that fans have been “brainwashed” by NASCAR talking points and vowed the trial would bring “truth” and change. NASCAR Commissioner Phelps said the series sought to settle the dispute before it reached court.
Possible outcomes vary widely. The parties could still settle at any stage, even after a verdict and on appeal. If the plaintiffs prevail, a jury will set monetary damages and U.S. District Judge Kenneth Bell could adjust and potentially treble the award under antitrust law. The court could also order structural remedies, from requiring the sale of assets to altering or dismantling the charter system or ordering changes in ownership, including forcing divestiture of tracks owned by the France family.
If NASCAR wins, 23XI and Front Row could face financial peril beyond 2026. Charters set aside for the plaintiffs might be sold; the last public charter sale was about $45 million, and NASCAR has indicated interest from potential buyers, including private equity firms.
A ruling on courtroom attendance for certain parties had not been issued as the trial approached. The two-week jury trial in the Western District of North Carolina is expected to probe the sport’s finances, internal dynamics and the strained relationships between team owners and league leadership.