Judge Bell Drops the Hammer on NASCAR Over Alleged Illicit Use of Confidential Richard Childress Evidence

The NASCAR antitrust trial involving 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports (FRM) has become one of the most significant storylines of the 2025 season. A week into the trial, both sides have revealed unpleasant information about each other, but the disclosures have seemingly hurt NASCAR more than the teams.

With both sides going all out in the legal battle, ethical boundaries have been repeatedly stretched. In the most recent update, Judge Kenneth D. Bell intervened when the confidentiality of Richard Childress was compromised, and he called out NASCAR for its actions.

Why Did Richard Childress Testify Against NASCAR?

As more figures testified in the courtroom, so did Childress. In leaked emails and conversations that went viral in the weeks leading up to the trial, Childress was one of the figures whose reputation suffered a blow due to derogatory remarks made by NASCAR executives.

So naturally, when Childress stepped up for his testimony, the team owner did not hesitate to speak bluntly about the governing body’s actions. Childress declared that teams were forced to sign the charter, given the circumstances under which the agreement was presented.

He even highlighted that if he were in a better financial position, he would have chosen not to sign the charter agreement. NASCAR argued that since 13 teams signed the deal, it was done with mutual understanding. However, with the testimony of Heather Gibbs and Childress, that narrative was no longer airtight for the sanctioning body.

Following this, NASCAR attorney Christopher Yates brought up the ownership structure of Richard Childress Racing, noting that Childress only owned 60% of the team. He then interrogated Childress about the role of Bobby Hillin Jr. as a direct or indirect owner.

Childress responded by stating that information about that subject was confidential, and NASCAR’s reference to it in the courtroom was a violation of privacy and the NDA agreement.

How Did Judge Bell Respond to the Privacy Violation?

When Judge Bell dismissed the jury, the plaintiffs demanded a judgment from the court over the governing body’s violation of the NDA. They also sought custody of the documents from the defendants.

According to courtroom data revealed by Matt Weaver of Motorsport.com, Judge Bell told NASCAR’s defense, “Mr. Childress certainly thought it shouldn’t have been in their possession.”

ALSO READ: Courtroom Drama Peaks as Judge Bell’s Sharp Sarcasm Silences NASCAR’s Complaint Against 23XI

Yates responded by noting that their reason behind the actions was to impeach Childress for making false claims against the governing body. However, Judge Bell was far from convinced by Yates’ explanation, insisting that his reasons still did not justify the act. He ordered both parties to work together on the matter and devise an appropriate solution.

Although the court has asked both NASCAR and the teams to cooperate on a solution, given the current state of affairs, it will be interesting to see how they resolve their differences on this matter.