What Is the Michael Jordan NASCAR Lawsuit?
The Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit is a private federal antitrust case between two race teams and NASCAR, not a class action or multidistrict litigation, and Jordan is its best-known figure rather than a named party. The plaintiffs are 2311 Racing LLC, which does business as 23XI Racing and is owned by entities Jordan controls alongside Denny Hamlin and Curtis Polk, and Front Row Motorsports, Inc. The defendants are the National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, LLC (NASCAR) and its chairman and CEO Jim France.
The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division, as Civil Action No. 3:24-cv-00886, and asserts two counts: monopolization under Section 2 of the Sherman Act and a contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade under Section 1. Because the two teams sued only for their own losses, there is no group of similarly situated claimants to join.
“This is a case about the unlawful monopolization of premier stock car racing by the France family in order to enrich themselves at the expense of the premier stock car racing teams that the fans come out to see and that sponsors and broadcasters value.”
Source: 2311 Racing LLC d/b/a 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, Inc. v. National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, LLC and James France, U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Case No. 3:24-cv-00886, Complaint, Document 1, paragraph 1 (filed October 2, 2024)
Why Was the Michael Jordan NASCAR Lawsuit Filed?
The Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit was filed because 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports refused to sign NASCAR's 2025 charter agreement and chose to sue instead. NASCAR presented the new terms as a take-it-or-leave-it offer with a midnight deadline on September 6, 2024; thirteen teams signed, and the two plaintiffs did not, which meant giving up their guaranteed charter entries for the 2025 season.
The main sticking point was permanence. The existing charters were revocable and time-limited, and the teams wanted permanent charters and a larger share of revenue, a request NASCAR and the France family declined. Jordan said in a March 2026 CBS interview that he was willing to lose the case and be pushed out of the sport to "wake up some people," and that once he decided to sue he was "all in."
Jordan and Hamlin bought 23XI Racing in 2020, reportedly investing $20 million and buying two charters, so the 2025 terms put the value of that investment directly at issue. Jordan told the court in December 2025 that attorneys had advised him the charter terms could violate antitrust law.
What Harms Does the Michael Jordan NASCAR Lawsuit Allege?
The Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit alleges four distinct categories of anticompetitive harm, each tied to a specific business practice described in the complaint. NASCAR denied wrongdoing throughout, and the case settled before any court or jury decided whether the allegations were true.
Racetrack Control and Exclusivity
Exclusive dealing is an arrangement that ties a business partner to one company, which can unlawfully keep competitors from reaching the market if enough of the necessary facilities are locked up.
The complaint alleges NASCAR bought a large cache of premier racetracks and barred any other premier stock car race from running on them, and imposed exclusivity terms on tracks it does not own as a condition of hosting a Cup Series race. Economist Edward Snyder, who testified for the teams, told Yale SOM that suitable tracks are scarce enough that a rival series would have almost nowhere to race.
Next Gen Equipment Requirements
A single-source requirement obliges buyers to purchase a product only from designated suppliers, which can raise costs and make switching to a competitor expensive.
The teams allege NASCAR required every Cup Series team to build cars to its Next Gen specification, controlled through patents and intellectual property, and to buy standardized parts from NASCAR-designated vendors. Duane Morris reports that cars containing those parts could not be entered in non-Cup competition, which the plaintiffs argue made leaving NASCAR for a rival series prohibitively expensive.
Non-Compete and Antitrust Release Terms
A release is a contract clause in which one party gives up the legal right to sue the other over specified conduct, and a non-compete restricts a party from working with a competitor.
The complaint alleges NASCAR used covenants not to compete to keep teams from racing outside its series, and Snyder said signing the 2025 charter would also have required a team to agree not to bring an antitrust claim. At trial, the teams' counsel described the charters' "goodwill" provision as a non-compete, a characterization NASCAR's executive vice president Scott Prime rejected on the stand, according to trial reporting.
Monopsony Control Over Team Revenue
A monopsony is the buyer-side counterpart of a monopoly: a single dominant buyer, here the only premier stock car series, that can set unfavorable terms because sellers have nowhere else to go.
The teams allege NASCAR used that position to hold teams' share of league revenue below a competitive level. Their attorney Jeffrey Kessler told the jury that more than 70 percent of teams lost money in 2024 according to a NASCAR-commissioned study, and Snyder compared teams' roughly 25 percent revenue share with about 45 percent in Formula One. NASCAR argued the new charter raised payouts and that teams were not required to sign.
What Is the Current Status of the Michael Jordan NASCAR Lawsuit?
The current status of the Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit is settled and closed. The parties announced the resolution on December 11, 2025, and no further rulings are expected absent a new filing.
2311 Racing LLC d/b/a 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, Inc. v. NASCAR and James France
Judge Kenneth D. Bell presided over the Charlotte trial, which opened on December 1, 2025 with Hamlin as the first witness and Jordan seated in the front row of the courtroom. The case ended in a settlement rather than a verdict, so no court has ruled on whether NASCAR violated the Sherman Act.
| Court | U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division |
| Case Number | 3:24-cv-00886 |
| Judge | Kenneth D. Bell |
| Filed | October 2, 2024 |
| Plaintiffs | 2311 Racing LLC d/b/a 23XI Racing, Front Row Motorsports, Inc. |
| Defendants | NASCAR, Jim France |
| Status | Settled December 11, 2025; financial terms confidential |
The judge's pretrial rulings are the last substantive court orders in the record. The settlement terms are described in the section on whether Jordan settled the lawsuit.
Did Michael Jordan Settle the NASCAR Lawsuit?
Yes. Michael Jordan's 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports settled the NASCAR lawsuit on December 11, 2025, the day after the plaintiffs rested their case, and the financial terms were not made public.
The parties' joint statement described a "mutually agreed-upon resolution," and NASCAR said the new structure gives teams evergreen charters, which are effectively permanent. Reporting indicates the two plaintiffs also received their charters back, but how much NASCAR paid, if anything, was not disclosed, and a settlement is not an admission of liability by either side.
The complaint sought trebled damages under the Clayton Act, and Snyder told Yale SOM his damages estimate for the two teams was $364.7 million, which trebling and fee-shifting would have pushed past $1 billion had the jury found NASCAR liable. Those figures describe the exposure NASCAR faced, not an amount NASCAR agreed to pay.
Jordan's own statement said the lawsuit "was about progress" for teams, drivers, partners, employees, and fans. Snyder estimated that most of the value of permanent charters flows to the thirteen teams that did not sue, since they hold about 30 of the cars against the plaintiffs' six.
Latest Michael Jordan NASCAR Lawsuit Updates
The latest Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit updates and news, including new filings, rulings, and case-count reports, are tracked below as they're confirmed. As of October 2026, the 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports antitrust case against NASCAR, Case No. 3:24-cv-00886 reached a settlement, described in the timeline below. See the full timeline below for every confirmed development since the litigation began.
Full Michael Jordan NASCAR Lawsuit Timeline
Jordan Discusses the Lawsuit and the Settlement With CBS Mornings
Michael Jordan told CBS Mornings co-anchor Gayle King that he was willing to lose the NASCAR lawsuit and be pushed out of the sport to "wake up some people," while his 23XI Racing team had won four of its first six races of the 2026 season.
NASCAR, 23XI Racing, and Front Row Announce a Confidential Settlement
NASCAR, 23XI Racing, and Front Row Motorsports jointly announced a mutually agreed resolution in a Charlotte courtroom on the ninth day of trial, with the financial terms confidential and a new evergreen charter structure for teams.
Michael Jordan Testifies in the Antitrust Trial
Michael Jordan testified in the Western District of North Carolina that "someone had to step forward to challenge NASCAR" and that the sport should operate more like the NBA, with a shared partnership between the league and its teams.
The Michael Jordan NASCAR Trial Opens in Charlotte
The jury trial began before Judge Kenneth D. Bell, with Denny Hamlin as the first witness for 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports and Jordan seated in the courtroom's front row.
Judge Bell Resolves Pretrial Motions on Experts and Evidence
Judge Bell issued a Memorandum and Order (Document 434) resolving the parties' Daubert and in limine motions after a November 12 hearing, including denying NASCAR's motion to exclude the plaintiffs' economist Edward Snyder.
The Court Rules in the Teams' Favor on the Relevant Market
Judge Bell ruled that premier stock car racing is the relevant market for the antitrust claims and rejected NASCAR's attempt to define the market differently for its own counterclaim, according to ESPN's reporting of the order.
Judge Bell Dismisses NASCAR's Counterclaim Against the Teams
Judge Bell granted summary judgment against NASCAR Event Management's counterclaim, which accused 23XI Racing, Front Row Motorsports, and co-owner Curtis Polk of illegally coordinating during charter negotiations, finding the coordination had little effect on competition.
The Parties Attend a Court-Ordered Settlement Conference
Mediator Jeffrey Mishkin led a settlement conference at Judge Bell's direction on October 21, and the parties met again the next day, but no agreement was reached before trial.
The Teams Seek Summary Judgment on NASCAR's Counterclaim
23XI Racing, Front Row Motorsports, and Curtis Polk filed a motion for summary judgment (Document 215) arguing the record showed no group boycott and no harm to competition from their joint charter negotiations.
The Court Denies a Second Request to Restore the Teams' Charters
After an August 28 hearing, at which Jordan told reporters he would fight the case "to the end for the betterment of the sport," the court denied the teams' renewed motion for a preliminary injunction.
The Fourth Circuit Reverses the Preliminary Injunction
A Fourth Circuit panel of Judges Niemeyer, Agee, and Thacker overturned the order that had let 23XI Racing and Front Row race as chartered teams, writing that the teams' antitrust theory was not supported by any case it was aware of.
The Court Grants 23XI Racing and Front Row a Preliminary Injunction
A federal judge granted the two teams a preliminary injunction allowing them to race as chartered entries during the 2025 season while the antitrust case continued.
23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports File the Antitrust Complaint
The two teams filed their complaint against NASCAR and Jim France in the Western District of North Carolina, asserting Sherman Act Section 2 monopolization and Section 1 restraint-of-trade claims and demanding a jury trial.
The Charter Signing Deadline Passes Without 23XI and Front Row
NASCAR's take-it-or-leave-it deadline for the 2025 charter agreements expired at midnight, with thirteen teams signed and only 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports declining.
What Evidence Was Presented in the Michael Jordan NASCAR Lawsuit?
The evidence in the Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit was presented over eight days of testimony before the settlement, and it combined team financial testimony, NASCAR executives' internal communications, and economic expert analysis. Because the case never reached a verdict, none of it was weighed by the jury.
Hamlin testified first about the teams' economics, and Front Row owner Bob Jenkins testified about operating losses over two decades. Heather Gibbs, chief operating officer of Joe Gibbs Racing, testified that her team signed the charter only because it felt it had "a gun to my head," evidence the plaintiffs used to argue the thirteen signatures did not show the terms were fair.
Jordan testified on December 5 and, according to NBC News, said NASCAR's structure was unfair to teams and drivers and needed to run more like the NBA. NASCAR's lawyers cross-examined him courteously, and the exchange ended with a joke about his sneakers. NASCAR's side countered that the charter system provided stability and higher payouts, and that the teams sued because negotiations failed.
How Did NASCAR Respond to the Michael Jordan NASCAR Lawsuit?
NASCAR denied the antitrust allegations throughout the case, arguing in its opening statement that the France family built the sport from nothing and that the teams sued because negotiations failed. Its position was that a charter is not required to compete, since four of the forty Cup Series spots are reserved for non-chartered "open" teams, and that the 2025 agreement raised team payouts.
NASCAR also went on offense inside the same case. NASCAR Event Management, LLC filed a counterclaim against 23XI Racing, Front Row Motorsports, and Curtis Polk alleging an unlawful agreement among teams during the charter negotiations, and Judge Bell granted summary judgment against it on October 28, 2025. Jim France said at settlement that the outcome "reaffirms our commitment to preserving and enhancing" the charter system, language that does not concede liability.
How Does the Michael Jordan NASCAR Lawsuit Compare to Related Cases?
The Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit is a single case, and several things sometimes described as separate lawsuits are procedural parts of it. The same case is also covered on this site from the teams' perspective in the 23XI Racing lawsuit and from the sanctioning body's perspective in the NASCAR lawsuit page.
| Matter | Parties | Relationship to this case | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| 23XI Racing and Front Row v. NASCAR (this page) | 23XI Racing, Front Row Motorsports v. NASCAR, Jim France | The main antitrust case, No. 3:24-cv-00886 | Settled December 11, 2025 |
| NASCAR Event Management counterclaim | NASCAR Event Management v. 23XI Racing, Front Row Motorsports, Curtis Polk | Filed inside the same case, not a separate lawsuit | Summary judgment against NASCAR, October 28, 2025 |
| Fourth Circuit preliminary injunction appeal | 23XI Racing, Front Row Motorsports v. NASCAR | Interlocutory appeal within the same case | Injunction reversed, June 5, 2025 |
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit about?
The Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit is a federal antitrust case that 23XI Racing, the team Jordan majority-owns, and Front Row Motorsports filed against NASCAR in October 2024, alleging NASCAR used monopoly and monopsony power to impose anticompetitive terms on race teams.
Is the Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit a class action?
No. The Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit is a private suit by two named corporate plaintiffs, not a class action or multidistrict litigation, so there is no claimant class to join or claim form to file.
Did Michael Jordan win the NASCAR lawsuit?
Michael Jordan's team settled rather than won a verdict. NASCAR, 23XI Racing, and Front Row Motorsports announced a confidential settlement on December 11, 2025, so no court or jury ruled on liability, though NASCAR agreed to evergreen charters.
Is the Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit still going on?
No. The Michael Jordan NASCAR lawsuit settled on December 11, 2025, and the case is closed, so no further rulings are expected unless a party files something new.
Was Michael Jordan a named plaintiff in the NASCAR lawsuit?
No. Michael Jordan was not a named plaintiff; the plaintiffs were 2311 Racing LLC, doing business as 23XI Racing, and Front Row Motorsports, Inc., though Jordan attended the trial and testified on December 5, 2025.
Is NASCAR's counterclaim a separate lawsuit from the Michael Jordan NASCAR case?
No. NASCAR Event Management's counterclaim against the teams and Curtis Polk was filed inside this same case, not as a separate lawsuit, and the judge granted summary judgment against it on October 28, 2025.