The NASCAR charter war took another dramatic turn Thursday as the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled in favor of NASCAR, overturning a lower court’s decision that temporarily granted 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports the right to compete as chartered teams in 2025.

In short: NASCAR wins this round. The two teams that dared to sue the sport they compete in have now lost their guaranteed place in the field—again.

According to the ruling, the December 18 decision by a lower court that handed each team three charters for the 2025 season—including one each purchased from the now-defunct Stewart-Haas Racing—has been vacated. That means no automatic starting spots, and no guaranteed slice of NASCAR’s multi-billion-dollar media rights pie. Not unless 23XI and Front Row can convince the court to reconsider.

The teams have 14 days to petition for a rehearing. Failing that, the judgment becomes final 21 days from now—on June 26, just two days before the Cup Series hits the newly rebranded EchoPark Speedway in Atlanta. A symbolic gut punch? Perhaps. But also a logistical nightmare for two multi-car operations with Daytona-sized ambitions and no guaranteed starting spots.

This is only the latest twist in a legal saga that started last October when 23XI and Front Row filed a lawsuit against NASCAR, arguing that they were unfairly shut out of charter ownership despite purchasing charters from Stewart-Haas Racing. When the Dec. 18 ruling gave them the green light, it looked like they’d successfully stuck it to the establishment.

But NASCAR quickly appealed that ruling, calling it “fraught with errors, both legally and factually” in a Feb. 12 brief. When oral arguments were heard on May 9, early indications hinted that the appellate judges were skeptical of the teams’ position. That skepticism has now translated into a full reversal.

ForbesNASCAR’s Charter War Heats Up As 23XI, Front Row File LawsuitBy Greg EngleForbesNASCAR’s Defense To 23XI, Front Row Lawsuit Revealed In Court FilingBy Greg Engle
ForbesNASCAR’s Charter Drama Shifts Gears With Court RulingBy Greg Engle

ForbesNASCAR Countersues 23XI And Front Row As Charter War EscalatesBy Greg Engle

NASCAR’s charter system, which functions like a franchise model, guarantees certain teams a spot on the starting grid and a share of media revenue. But the current system also hinges on participation in the NASCAR Charter Agreement. When 23XI and Front Row declined to sign the most recent iteration of that agreement, NASCAR took the position that they had forfeited any charter-related benefits—even for charters they claimed to own.

The Dec. 18 ruling temporarily rewrote that narrative. Now, the appellate court has rewritten it again.

The decision throws another wrench into 2025 plans for both teams. Without charters, their drivers must qualify on speed each week. Sponsorship deals become trickier. And any illusion of stability in the garage has been vaporized by legal fumes.

As it stands, 23XI Racing, co-owned by Michael Jordan and Denny Hamlin, and Front Row Motorsports, which expanded aggressively by acquiring SHR assets, now find themselves staring at the same uphill legal road they thought they’d already climbed. It’s unclear whether they will file for a rehearing or take the fight all the way to the Supreme Court.

In a statement, Jeffrey Kessler, attorney for 23XI and Front Row Motorsports, said the teams were “disappointed” in the ruling but remained confident heading into their December 1 trial date.

“We are disappointed by today’s ruling by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and are reviewing the decision to determine our next steps,” Kessler said. “This ruling is based on a very narrow consideration of whether a release of claims in the charter agreements is anti-competitive and does not impact our chances of winning at trial scheduled for December 1. We remain confident in our case and committed to racing for the entirety of this season as we continue our fight to create a fair and just economic system for stock car racing that is free of anticompetitive, monopolistic conduct.”

What is clear: NASCAR has reclaimed the high ground—for now. And with the next round of Charter Agreements expected to shape the sport’s financial future for a decade, the battle lines are only getting deeper.

We’re heading to the fastest two miles in NASCAR. Michigan International Speedway is all about raw speed, clean air, and who brought the biggest engine to the party. Long green-flag runs are the norm here, so you need drivers who can hold pace, manage track position, and punch hard on restarts.

Here’s who I’m backing this week: two favorites, two mid-tier values, two longshots, and three props that are too sharp to ignore.

The Favorites

Denny Hamlin (+600 at BetMGM)
He’s been flirting with wins for weeks, and Michigan has treated him well. Two wins, six top-six finishes in his last seven starts here, and speed every single week when the car doesn’t fall apart. The 11 team was clean at Nashville and grabbed third. If they…

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — A three-judge federal appellate panel ruled in favor of NASCAR in the antitrust lawsuit filed by two teams, one owned by Michael Jordan.

The judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia, on Thursday vacated an injunction that required 23XI and Front Row be recognized as chartered teams as their case snakes through the legal system.

Both race teams sued NASCAR late last year after refusing to sign new agreements on charter renewals. Jordan owns 23XI. The charter system is similar to franchises in other sports, but the charters are revocable by NASCAR.

Formula 1 is hot on the tail of the big dog of professional sports marketing, the NFL, and cleared $2.04 billion in sponsorship revenue in 2024.

SponsorUnited, which tracks sponsorship and advertising takes across sports, had F1 and its teams behind only the NFL at $2.5 billion in total sponsorship revenue.

The total advertising spend for F1 in 2025 is on course to exceed $2.5 billion, according to Ampere Analysis.

But major U.S. sponsors such as American Express and IBM still are flowing in with the circuit catapulting in popularity off the success of Netflix series “Drive to Survive” while thriving under the control of Liberty Media.

F1 tops the NBA, MLB and NHL and its racing teams each accounted for more than $6 million, according to the report, which breaks down the airbox and sidepod ad placement cost at more than $5 million for the most popular drivers on the circuit.

Tops among individual sponsor agreements with F1 is the 10-year, $1 billion pact with luxury conglomerate LVMH, which holds a portfolio anchored by TAG Heuer, Louis Vuitton and Hennessy.

The largest sponsor for any F1 team is the Williams contract with Australian software corporation Atlassian valued at a reported $25 million to $30 million per year.

On the NFL side, the most significant singular sponsorship commitment is with Pepsi. That contract is worth a reported $2 billion over 10 years for exclusive rights at all NFL events and use of the league’s trademark in advertising.

With F1, Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull and McLaren are the highest earners in the sponsorship category.

Car and driver technology accounts for nearly $500 million in partner income for the 10 teams, according to the report.

–Field Level Media

Here is a breakdown of Thursday’s court decision and its impact:

WHAT HAPPENED THURSDAY?

A three-judge panel from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled to vacate the preliminary injunction that a U.S. District court judge had granted 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports to run as chartered teams despite not signing the charter agreement.

HOW DOES THURSDAY’S DECISION IMPACT MATTERS THIS WEEKEND AT MICHIGAN?

It does not in any way.

WHY?

23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports can file a petition for rehearing (requesting the court reconsider its decision) or a petition for rehearing en banc —meaning the full Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals addresses the matters instead of the three-judge panel.

This must be filed within 14 calendar days after entry of judgment (June 5). So that would put the deadline at June 19.

IF THE TEAMS DO NOT SEEK A REHEARING, THEN WHAT HAPPENS?

The decision by the three-judge panel becomes effective seven days after the expiration of time for filing a petition for rehearing.

In this matter, that would mean the panel’s decision could become effective on June 26 — two days before the Atlanta race.

WHAT HAPPENS IN THAT SITUATION?

The 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports cars would be classified as open cars instead of chartered cars.

WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THEIR CHARTERS?

That would be up to NASCAR.

SO 23XI RACING AND FRONT ROW MOTORSPORTS COULD CONCEIVABLY FAIL TO QUALIFY FOR RACES IF THEY LOST THEIR CHARTERS?

If they were an open team, yes, but, in the 50 races since the start of last year, only two — the Daytona 500 last year and this year — had any cars fail to qualify.

BUT BOTH TEAMS WOULD EARN LESS MONEY AS AN OPEN TEAM, CORRECT?

Yes, but before one goes too far down this road, let’s see what 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports decide to do after today’s court opinion. For now, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports remain chartered teams and their six cars are all chartered cars.

WHAT WAS THE RESPONSE FROM THE TEAMS THURSDAY?

This is the statement from Jeffrey Kessler, the lead attorney for 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports:

“We are disappointed by today’s ruling by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and are reviewing the decision to determine our next steps. This ruling is based on a very narrow consideration of whether a release of claims in the charter agreements is anti-competitive and does not impact our chances of winning at trial scheduled for December 1. We remain confident in our case and committed to racing for the entirety of this season as we continue our fight to create a fair and just economic system for stock car racing that is free of anticompetitive, monopolistic conduct.”

WHAT DID THE THREE-JUDGE PANEL STATE IN ITS OPINION?

“In entering a preliminary injunction in this case, the district court held that the plaintiffs (23XI and Front Row) were likely to succeed on the merits of their antitrust action against the National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, LLC (NASCAR), and its CEO, James France, because NASCAR, as an alleged monopolist, required the plaintiffs, as a condition of doing business with them, to enter into a release for past conduct. Because that theory of antitrust law is not supported by any case of which we are aware, we conclude that it was not a likely basis for success on the merits and vacate the injunction.”

The judges later stated in their opinion …

“In short, because we have found no support for the proposition that a business entity or person violates the antitrust laws by requiring a prospective participant to give a release for past conduct as a condition for doing business, we cannot conclude that the plaintiffs made a clear showing that they were likely to succeed on the merits of that theory. And without satisfaction of the likelihood-of-success element, the plaintiffs were not entitled to a preliminary injunction. … We therefore conclude that the district court abused its discretion in entering the preliminary injunction that it did.

HOW DOES THIS IMPACT THE LAWSUIT 23XI RACING AND FRONT ROW MOTORSPORTS FILED LAST YEAR VS. NASCAR?

It does not. Trial is scheduled for Dec. 1.