Michael Jordan-owned 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports insist in a new court filing Thursday that NASCAR is “blaming victims for asserting their antitrust rights” and that the two teams should be awarded an injunction against NASCAR.
There’s a new audience for a case where brazen rhetoric by billionaire parties has become commonplace.
More from Sportico.com
On Wednesday, a North Carolina federal district court announced that U.S. District Judge Frank D. Whitney—who last month denied the plaintiffs’ first motion for an injunction—is no longer assigned to the case. U.S. District Judge Kenneth D. Bell now presides. The move, which was made without explanation, could alter the timeline for the litigation. If not dismissed or settled, the case currently contemplates an eight-to-10-month pretrial discovery period ending in fall 2025.
23XI Racing and Front Row seek an injunction that would convey the benefits of competing as a charter team, instead of an open team, without having to sign a charter agreement or releasing legal claims. The demand for an injunction is part of the two teams’ antitrust case against NASCAR and CEO Jim France, who they accuse of monopolizing the marketplace for stock car racing teams.
Earlier this week, NASCAR urged the court to deny the plaintiffs’ motion for an injunction. Emphasizing that one should only be granted in “extraordinary circumstances,” NASCAR maintained 23XI Racing and Front Row fail to explain what specific and irreparable harms they would suffer in the absence of an injunction—no driver or sponsor has said it will cut ties without an injunction and any damage would be economic and curable by money. NASCAR also attributed any harms suffered by 23XI Racing and Front Row to “self-infliction” and blamed them for “manufacturing evidence” in the form of (possibly) coordinated emails by drivers.
In Thursday’s brief, which is partially redacted, 23XI Racing and Front Row insist they have demonstrated irreparable harm—a kind of harm that money can’t remedy—because they can only compete as chartered teams if they release their antitrust claims.
The plaintiffs also claim that NASCAR has exacerbated irreparable harm by “reneging on its agreement to approve the transfer of a Stewart-Haas Racing LLC charter to Front Row.” As 23XI Racing and Front Row tell it, NASCAR assured Front Row the transfer of the Stewart-Haas Racing was approved. However, that would have happened before Front Row sued NASCAR a few months ago in a complaint deriding NASCAR and France as “monopolistic bullies.” 23XI Racing and Front Row assert NASCAR “has done an about face” on the transfer and that ought to corroborate their irreparable harm argument.
23XI Racing and Front Row seem particularly offended by NASCAR’s assertion that the two teams’ damages are “self-inflicted” since they refused to sign a deal and sparked a public controversy by suing. 23XI Racing and Front Row describe themselves as proudly sticking to their guns, refusing to “acquiesce to NASCAR’s demands” and waging a battle to stop “monopolistic abuses.”
23XI Racing and Front Row attorney Jeffrey Kessler requested from Whitney that he decide on the motion by Dec. 18 in order for 23XI Racing and Front Row to meet a contractual deadline. 23XI Racing and Front Row insist the ability to make a purchase from Stewart-Haas Racing hinges in part on whether there is a continued obligation to release legal claims. The prospect of Bell deciding by that date remains to be seen.
Best of Sportico.com
Sign up for Sportico’s Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
