23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports Facing Charterless Uncertainty for at Least the Next Two NASCAR Cup Series Races

What’s Happening?

The court has denied 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, the two teams suing NASCAR, a temporary restraining order that would have prevented their loss of charter status.

23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports will be open teams for at least upcoming races at Dover and Indianapolis after they were denied a temporary restraining order to keep NASCAR from revoking their chartered status.

— Bob Pockrass (@bobpockrass) July 17, 2025

This means that the two teams’ six entries will not automatically be qualified into this weekend’s race at Dover Motor Speedway and next weekend’s Indianapolis Motor Speedway over the next two weekends. However, NASCAR has clarified that there are no more than 40 open entries in these two races, which factored into this decision.

These two teams held out on signing NASCAR’s 2025 Charter Agreement, risking losing the franchise-like possessions that grant teams automatic entry and a large share of revenue.

Nevertheless, the teams filed for a preliminary injunction after suing NASCAR to compete as chartered teams throughout the duration of this lawsuit. This first injunction was denied, but after refiling with new evidence, the teams were granted their injunction on Dec. 18.

NASCAR’s legal team appealed this decision and won this appeal on June 5. Since then, the two teams have battled to maintain the valuable charters by requesting this now-denied temporary restraining order and another ongoing preliminary injunction.

This pursuit is based not only on the potential loss of benefits should the teams not maintain their charters but also on the potential loss of drivers and sponsors. In particular, on Nov. 4, the team’s lawyer, Jeffery Kessler, claimed that 23XI Racing’s star driver, Tyler Reddick, has an out in his contract should the team lose charter status.

Shortly after today’s ruling, via a press release, Kessler said the teams are disappointed, yet they “remain confident that our motion for a preliminary injunction is legally warranted and necessary, and we look forward to the court’s full review.”

We have covered this lawsuit extensively via the link below.

What do you think about this? Let us know your opinion on Discord or X. Don’t forget that you can also follow us on Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube.