Just recently, NASCAR and two teams involved in the ongoing antitrust lawsuit walked out of a two-day mediation in Charlotte with no deal in sight. Overseen by Judge Kenneth Bell and mediator Jeffrey Mishkin, the high-stakes talks were supposed to find common ground before the December 1 trial. Instead, both sides left the table tight-lipped, their silence hinting at the deep divide that remains.

The failed negotiation now sets the stage for one of the most significant legal battles in NASCAR history – a case that could not only redefine team ownership and revenue sharing across the sport but also NASCAR’s core. And as new court filings emerge, NASCAR’s stance is growing louder and, importantly, costlier by the day. Here’s the latest update:

NASCAR fires back at 23XI and Front Row Motorsports

The NASCAR lawsuit battle took another interesting turn today. As you are aware, both parties haven’t held back from attacking each other. And now, with trial briefs officially filed, NASCAR isn’t holding back in its response to the ongoing antitrust lawsuit brought by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports.

According to a report from Fox Sports’ Bob Pockrass, the sanctioning body accuses teams of seeking “hundreds of millions of dollars in damages that they intend to keep for themselves,” insisting that “there is no evidence to support such an award.” In its preliminary statement, NASCAR lays out its defense by reminding the court of its long-standing history of collaboration with teams, manufacturers, and partners over eight decades. The organization argues that its success has been “built on hard work, investments, and innovation and not anticompetitive conduct,” as claimed by 23XI and Front Row Motorsports.

At the heart of the NASCAR lawsuit, 23XI and FRM allege that NASCAR has maintained a monopoly over what they call the “premier stock car racing team market,” violating federal antitrust laws under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act. The teams claim NASCAR’s track sanctioning and IP licensing agreements tied to the Next-Gen car structure create unfair restraints of trade and limit competition.

NASCAR, however, flatly rejects those accusations. The filing emphasizes that the Sherman Act “protects competition, not competitors,” and that the governing body has the right to choose “with whom it will deal.” In simpler terms, NASCAR argues it hasn’t broken any laws, it’s just operating within its rights as a business. They can say “no” to deals they don’t like, just like any company can.

The statement also takes a jab at the plaintiffs’ damages claim. NASCAR points out that the teams signed contracts with them, got paid what they were owed, and now, after the contracts ended, the teams are trying to ask for more money. With the December 1 trial fast approaching, this battle over money, power, and control within NASCAR’s structure is about to hit full speed in court.

Trial ground rules set for NASCAR lawsuit

In an unexpected moment of cooperation, attorneys for NASCAR, 23XI Racing, and Front Row Motorsports have agreed on several stipulations ahead of their high-profile NASCAR lawsuit trial. One of the key agreements prohibits personal attacks during proceedings.

Earlier this month, discovery leaked text messages showed highly charged exchanges where Michael Jordan referred to rival teams as “p—–” for signing NASCAR’s charter deal. On the other hand, Denny Hamlin expressed deep disdain for the France family.

Similarly, NASCAR has accused both teams of manipulating others and their conduct as “classic cartel behavior, ultimately because they received less than they would have.” This restraint aims to keep the focus strictly on legal arguments rather than personal animosities.

Another critical stipulation in the NASCAR lawsuit bars any discussion or reference to other legal cases where they have opposed each other. NASCAR and the teams have long histories of litigation on various matters. Preventing references to these prior cases ensures the jury will assess only the current antitrust claims without preconceived notions formed by earlier conflicts.

Perhaps most notably, all parties have agreed not to mention or speculate on the circumstances surrounding Brian France’s departure from NASCAR leadership. Brian France, who took over from his father Bill France Jr., served as NASCAR’s CEO and chairman until 2018, stepping down following multiple controversies, including a 2018 DUI arrest. His exit ushered in a new era under Jim France. However, his tumultuous tenure remains a sensitive topic that could detract from the case’s legal focus.

With these ground rules established, the trial scheduled for December 1, 2025, promises to be a tightly controlled battle of legal strategy and not personal grievances.