

In a high-stakes courtroom drama unfolding in Charlotte, Michael Jordan took the stand in landmark antitrust lawsuit filed by his team. The lawsuit's central issue is around the introduction of NASCAR's 2016 charter system, which offers teams guaranteed starting spots and a share of the revenue. The plaintiffs talk about the 112-page renewal contract, which was given to them in September 2024 as a kind of ultimatum: they had only a few hours to sign the contract, or they would lose their charters and thus their future viability. According to 23XI Racing, this action is in violation of antitrust laws as it restricts competition and leads to the formation of an oligopoly in the market. On the other hand, NASCAR argues that the charter model is a source of stability, fairness, and long-term value for the teams and the sport.
Jordan, in his deposition, said that he and Denny Hamlin, the co-owner, put almost $40 million into 23XI Racing before the 2024 charter, renewal drive, a figure that he believes illustrates the team's commitment and that they have taken financial risks under the present system. According to him, he "was not scared" of going against NASCAR and was ready to confront them by saying that the renewal contract's terms were unacceptable, especially the clauses that could prohibit future litigation. Jordan insisted that the system ought to be like a franchise model, where charters are permanent and can be turned over to someone else, similar to other North American professional sports leagues. He alleged that the top management at NASCAR, including CEO Jim France, was not inclined to renegotiate the contract substantially despite their repeated requests.
At the very beginning of the court session, Denny Hamlin, a co-owner, emotionally testified about the financial strain and the escalated costs of running a Cup car. He estimated the costs at ~US$20 million per season per car under the current revenue-sharing model. Another witness, a team executive, talked about attempts to negotiate during the charter, renewal period and mentioned that they were pressured and faced aggressive tactics by NASCAR when they opposed the ultimatum.
If the plaintiffs triumph in court, the effects could be tremendously far-reaching for NASCAR: a court could declare the charter system illegal or decide to make changes to it, thus giving teams the freedom to sell or transfer their charters as they wish. This would impact the valuation of teams, league dynamics, and the flow of money into the sport. Conversely, a decision in favour of NASCAR might mean tighter control over the team structure and centralized governance being maintained, although the shadow of long-term team viability might scare off potential new entrants.
The judges will definitely require a considerable amount of time to go through the legal arguments, the company’s internal communications, the financial disclosures, and the overall business model that is being used. Some of the big unanswered questions revolve around whether the emails and documents from within the company will show that there was an intent to monopolize, in what way damages will be calculated, and if the eventual remedies might involve changes in how money is distributed, charter terms, or consent decrees.
Jordan's performance garnered extensive media attention, with the audience filling the courthouse and eagerly following every instant. A lot of people watching this event see it as not just a single team's complaint but as an examination of whether the tenets that have been supporting the world of motor sports for years can be challenged by the current antitrust law. The decision is still up in the air for now; however, as the proceedings go on, people cannot take their eyes off the situation, wondering whether NASCAR's charter system will cease to exist in its current form.
For more updates, join/follow our WhatsApp, Telegram and YouTube channels.