In a pretty bluntly worded court order, the federal judge overseeing the antitrust lawsuit brought by two Cup Series teams against NASCAR has issued a short delay on enforcing the preliminary injunction awarded earlier in the week.
On Wednesday, judge Kenneth D. Bell issued a decision that NASCAR would need to recognize 23XI and Front Row as having chartered status for the 2025 Cup Series team while also forcing the sanctioning body to approve the transaction of the Stewart-Haas racing charters purchased by each of the two teams.
NASCAR will soon file an appeal on that decision with the fourth circuit court in Richmond, Virginia but asked judge Bell on Thursday night to delay the injunctive relief pending the appeal – citing irreparable harm and an inability to undo being in a binding relationship with the two teams that have rejected the terms of the 2025-to-2031 charter agreement.
The judge granted a partial delay, through Monday, but is also allowing time for 23XI and Front Row to respond to NASCAR’s reasoning for delaying the forced transfers of the Stewart-Haas charters purchased this past season.
Bell seemed to chastise NASCAR’s lawyers for filing a request to strike from the record 23XI and Front Row’s request to add the SHR charter transfers to the injunctive request in a response rather than part of the initial filing instead of formally presenting an opposition.
The judge writes:
“Contrary to Defendants’ suggestion, the Court did not limit their ability to present their position and evidence in any way, including with respect to the issue of the transfer of the Stewart Haas Racing charters. Defendants could have filed all of the arguments and exhibits they presented in one day in support of their motion to stay in the six days between Plaintiffs’ ‘notice; with respect to the issue and the issuance of the injunction order.
“Instead, Defendants made the strategic decision to file a Motion to Strike (which included many, if not all, of the same arguments now presented) rather than simply put in the record everything they now ask the Court to consider.”
With that said, the judge wrote that the court wanted the appropriate time to consider what NASCAR argued while also giving the teams a chance to respond.
“With respect to the timing of Plaintiffs’ response to that motion, the Court finds that it would be unreasonable to require Plaintiffs to respond in a single day. Plaintiffs shall have until December 23, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. to file any response to Defendants’ Motion to Stay Pending Appeal, and Defendants shall not file a reply.”
In other words, the teams must respond to NASCAR’s motion to delay the charter transfers by 10a, at which point the judge will then consider both arguments and make his ruling by the end of day before the holidays.
One of the other issues NASCAR brought up with the court was that the sanctioning body felt forcing them to recognize 23XI and Front Row as chartered would mean entering into a ‘7-to-14 year agreement’ that could not be undone if the teams were ultimately unsuccessful in the lawsuit.
The judge also pushed back on those assertions as well.
“Defendants are incorrect that the injunction requires NASCAR to enter into a ‘seven to fourteen year’ contractual relationship with Plaintiffs. With respect to their existing chartered cars, Plaintiffs are entitled – only for the 2025 race season – to race under the terms of the 2025 Charter Agreement … and NASCAR is not obligated to enter into a Charter Agreement.
“For the transfer of the Stewart Hass Racing charters, the Court ordered NASCAR to immediately approve the transfers so that the transactions could close and Plaintiffs would not suffer the irreparable harm of losing the opportunity to acquire the charters; however, the Court clearly retains the equitable power to in the future effectively ‘unwind’ those transactions through an order requiring Plaintiffs to transfer/sell the charters back to NASCAR or another team approved by NASCAR.
“Therefore, Defendants are also not irrevocably bound to a long-term contractual relationship on those charters.”
Translation: The judge is saying his court is not binding NASCAR to 23XI and Front Row under a long-term one-sided charter agreement, featuring only the terms the teams found amenable without those they did not.
Bell is saying that the court merely ordered NASCAR to de facto recognize the two teams as chartered over the course of the 2025 season, to protect the status quo from previous seasons, until this matter can be resolved in the court.
It’s worth noting, that part of NASCAR’s appeal will have that court to have the sanctioning body only allow the teams entry into every race, two cars apiece, but not acquire the third charter each and also not be paid as if they had charters in 2025.
The full court order can be download at the link below.
Lawsuit timeline
23XI Racing, Front Row decline to sign NASCAR’s final 2025-2031 charter document
Why 23XI, Front Row filed a lawsuit against NASCAR
23XI, Front Row makes his case in antitrust lawsuit against NASCAR
Richard Childress says he had ‘no choice’ but to sign charter document
How drivers feel about the lawsuit
Michael Jordan comments on his team’s lawsuit against NASCAR
Meet NASCAR’s antitrust defense lawyer
NASCAR files injunction to be included in charter system through lawsuit
NASCAR motions against team’s preliminary injunction request
NASCAR, teams consent to redacting charter details in filings
Teams make case for injunctive relief, expedited discovery
NASCAR’s lengthy rebuttal to injunction, lawsuit
Teams respond to NASCAR response over injunction
23XI, Front Row and NASCAR go to court over injunctions
Judge rules against teams preliminary injunction request
Denny Hamlin says 23XI may not race next year
What preliminary injunction denial means for lawsuit
NASCAR drops ‘lawsuit release clause’ in open agreement
Appeal timeline rebuttal filed by NASCAR
Why 23XI may not have to race in the Clash without charters
Teams drop appeal, may re-file in district court
23XI, Front Row re-file injunction request
NASCAR opposes expedited timeline
France, NASCAR motion to dismiss, deny SHR charter transfer request
NASCAR says injunctive request still fails to show irreparable harm
Teams say NASCAR went back on its word over SHR charters
23XI, Front Row respond to NASCAR’s motion to dismiss
Judge orders NASCAR to issue charters to 23XI, Front Row
NASCAR plans to appeal injunction ruling; other details
Judge grants partial stay of injunction in blunt response to NASCAR
