CHARLOTTE, N.C. — NASCAR’s revenue-sharing charter system is under threat of being disbanded, according to a Wednesday counterclaim filed by the stock-car racing series against 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, each of those a three-car team that competes in the top-tier Cup Series.
Front Row is owned by entrepreneur Bob Jenkins, while 23XI is co-owned by Joe Gibbs Racing driver Denny Hamlin, six-time NBA champion Michael Jordan and Curtis Polk, the business manager for the retired basketball legend.
In countersuing the teams, NASCAR singled out Polk by naming him as a defendant.
It’s the latest legal step in a state of contentiousness that began after more than two years of negotiations on new charter agreements — NASCAR’s equivalent of a franchise model in other pro sports leagues such as MLB and the NBA, NFL and NHL — and the 30-page filing contends that Polk “willfully” violated antitrust laws by orchestrating anticompetitive collective conduct in connection with the most recent charter agreements.
Of the 15 organizations with Cup Series charters at the time, 23XI and Front Row were the only two that refused to sign the new agreements, which were presented to all teams last September in a nonnegotiable offer 48 hours before the start of the playoffs.
The charters were fought for by the teams ahead of the 2016 season and twice have been extended. The latest extension is for seven years to match the current media rights deal, guarantee 36 of the 40 spots for cars in the field at each points race to the teams that hold the charters, and ensure other financial incentives. After refusing to sign, 23XI and Front Row then sued, alleging NASCAR and the France family — which founded and owns the stock-car organization (which acts as its own sanctioning body) — are a monopoly in violation of federal antitrust laws.
NASCAR already has lost one round in court in which the two teams have been recognized as chartered organizations for the 2025 season. NASCAR has also appealed a decision to have the case dismissed.
“Today’s counterclaim by NASCAR is a meritless distraction and a desperate attempt to shift attention away from its own unlawful, monopolistic actions,” said attorney Jeffrey Kessler, who is representing 23XI and Front Row.
“NASCAR agreed to the joint negotiations that they now attack. When those joint negotiations failed, they used individual negotiations to impose their charter terms, which most of the teams decided they had no choice but to accept.”
In the counterclaim, Polk is repeatedly singled out as the ringleader against the current charter proposals. NASCAR attorney Christopher Yates went so far as to tell The Associated Press that Polk does not understand the sport’s business model.
“Curtis Polk basically orchestrated and threatened a boycott of one of the qualifying races for a major event and others did not go along with him,” Yates said. “He got other teams to boycott a meeting that was required by the charter. When you have a threatened boycott of qualifying races that are covered by media, that’s not a good thing for other race teams, not a good thing when you are trying to collectively grow the sport.”
Regarding the boycotts, Yates was referring to a meeting in 2023 and the pair of 150-mile duels that set the field for the Daytona 500 in 2024.
“I don’t think Mr. Polk really understands the sport,” Yates told the AP. “I think he came into it, and his view is it should be much more like the NBA or other league sports. But it’s not. No motorsport is like that. He’s done a lot of things that might work in the NBA or might be OK in the NBA but just are not appropriate in NASCAR.”
NASCAR’s complaint alleges “the undisputed reality is that it is 23XI and FRM, led by 23XI’s owner and sports agent Curtis Polk, that willfully violated the antitrust laws by orchestrating anticompetitive collective conduct in connection with the terms of the 2025 Charter Agreements.”
“It is truly ironic that in trying to blow-up the Charter system, 23XI and FRM have sought to weaponize the antitrust laws to achieve their goals,” the counterclaim reads, alleging Polk’s threats are “attempting to misuse the legal system as a last resort to secure new terms.”
NASCAR’s counterclaim seeks an injunction eliminating guaranteed starting spots for charter teams. It wants the four combined charters held by 23XI and Front Row before the lawsuit to be returned to NASCAR, and it wants to dissolve the two charters each team purchased (from Stewart-Haas Racing, which went from four cars to one as Haas Factory Team this year) ahead of the current season for their own individual expansion.
“There’s a misperception out there that somehow 23XI and Front Row might achieve something that other teams can take advantage of, and that’s just not right,” Yates told the AP. “This is not going to be a renegotiation. NASCAR has no intent of renegotiating the terms of the charter. Front Row and 23XI are threatening the charter system and its continuation, and NASCAR is fine without the charter system.
“The charter system was created at the request of the teams. That was before 23XI and Curtis Polk’s time; I don’t think they understand that history. But if they succeed with their lawsuit and the charter system goes away, that’s OK.”
Yates told the AP he has asked Kessler what is it the two teams want and cannot get a straight answer. He said the new charters guarantee teams nearly 50% of revenue.
“The mere fact that the lawsuit calls the system into question, I really think 23XI and Front Row are being pretty selfish in terms of what they are trying to do, and I don’t think they are taking into account the 32 teams that have signed the charters and think it is a good deal for them,” Yates said, with his 32 a reference to each car-based charter rather than organizations, most of which hold two or more charters.
“Do some of them think they should have gotten more? I’m sure. Does NASCAR think it should have gotten more? Absolutely. But NASCAR does not see the charter system as necessary.”
Jordan has said he’s suing NASCAR on behalf of all the teams so that even the smallest ones can receive equal footing in terms of benefits as a participant in the top motorsports series in the United States.
“My clients’ lawsuit has always been about transforming NASCAR into a more competitive and fair sport for the benefit of drivers, fans, sponsors and teams because of their love of the sport,” Kessler said. “Every major sport goes through a transition to competition when antitrust claims are asserted, and that moment has come for NASCAR. Today’s baseless filing changes nothing. We are confident in the strength of our case and look forward to presenting it at trial.”
Among the improvements in the 2025 charters is a more equitable revenue share, but missing is the demand that teams wanted the charters to become permanent. NASCAR at its discretion can claw back charters from underperforming teams or eliminate the system completely. Yates said NASCAR has no intention of renegotiating the charters signed in September, nor did he see a scenario in which NASCAR settles the lawsuit.
He said the discovery process already has begun for the trial, which is set for December (if the case is not dismissed before then).
“Polk and 23XI’s other owners openly professed that they wanted to change NASCAR’s economic model by demanding more money for the teams from NASCAR media revenues, instead of teams competing against each other,” Yates said. “However, 23XI and FRM did not merely reject the terms of the 2025 Charters. Rather, those teams embarked on a strategy to threaten, coerce, and extort NASCAR into meeting their demands for better contract and financial terms.”