NASCAR resists 23XI, injunction request on Front Row

On Wednesday night, NASCAR filed a rebuttal to the injunction requested by 23XI and Front Row Motorsports. Both teams have asked to be allowed to continue participating in charter racing in 2025 while their antitrust lawsuit against the series awaits resolution.

The controversy stems from negotiations over a 2025 NASCAR Cup Series charter agreement that lasted more than two years before ending with what series officials said was a final offer in late August. 23XI and Front Row Motorsports were the only teams to miss the deadline without signing a contract, and earlier this month they followed suit by filing a preliminary injunction that, if granted, would allow them to maintain their charter status with associated benefits next year. year.

In NASCAR’s rebuttal this week, they accused both teams of “attempting to force NASCAR to enter into a contract on plaintiffs’ preferred terms” and said their request “falls far short of the strict standards required to obtain mandatory injunctive relief.”

“The proposal seeks to change the status quo, not maintain it; we are talking about money, not about irreparable harm; and cannot demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits. This lawsuit is not intended to protect competition; Plaintiffs are trying to get more money than they could have gotten through arm’s length negotiations. The proposal should be rejected.”

The series goes on to describe the team’s request as a “master class in contradictions,” noting that both teams describe the 2025 Charter as anti-competitive, “despite the fact that it is the product of collective bargaining by racing teams that have secured guaranteed spots in Cup Series racing and a much larger share of NASCAR media revenue.” He also noted that the teams are asking the court to force NASCAR to give them the very terms they rejected at the signing deadline, and that they never filed a complaint during the two-year negotiation period during which they were in force under the previous Charter agreement of 2016.

“These contradictions reveal plaintiffs’ motive: to use this trial to extract more money and better contract terms from NASCAR,” the series says.

Elsewhere in its denial, NASCAR highlights what it says is evidence of expanded collaboration with teams over the decades and cites concessions it made during recent charter negotiations, including increasing the team’s share of media revenue.

The company says it also offered to extend bylaws but declined to make them permanent, prompting teams to boycott a Team Owners Council meeting in early April. From that point on, NASCAR negotiated with the teams and their lawyers on a case-by-case basis. After he made what he called a “final offer” with an Aug. 31 deadline, 13 teams representing 32 charters signed on. 23XI and Front Row did not, despite being given extra time.

23XI and Front Row each submitted two charter bids and each agreed to purchase a third from Stewart-Haas Racing, although NASCAR said neither team has applied to take over those charters.

In concluding its rebuttal, NASCAR said the relief sought by the “plaintiffs” would cause real harm to NASCAR and its 32 charter holders.

“Teams need to budget for next season and NASCAR needs to calculate and communicate to teams the prize money available for each race. NASCAR cannot simply reissue the 2025 bylaws without affecting charter teams and other stakeholders, especially after the plaintiffs’ refusal to sign the 2025 bylaws.
Charters has increased prize amounts for both charter and open teams.

“Moreover, forcing NASCAR to enter into an unwanted contract is contrary to the public interest.”

A hearing on the injunction is scheduled for November 4.