NASCAR Insider shares 3 reasons why 23XI Racing and FRM are rushing appeal against denied injunction by the federal court

The federal court recently denied 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports' preliminary injunction request to run as chartered teams in the 2025 NASCAR Cup Series season. District Judge Frank D. Whitney was reportedly convinced by NASCAR's take that the team's claim of suffering irreparable harm and losing sponsors and drivers, to name a few, were baseless.

As a result, he ordered in favor of the defendants. Nonetheless, the plaintiffs filed an appeal against the decision, and are looking to expedite the matter by at least before January 28, four days before the Clash at Bowman Gray Stadium. NASCAR rebutted the opposing party's take and expressed there is no urgency to appeal the matter.

That being said, Bob Pockrass of Fox Sports has shared three major asks of 23XI Racing and FRM as they rush to appeal against the federal court's injunction rejection.

#1. 23XI Racing and FRM must know the final decision before January 28

The team communicated they needed to land a conclusive ground atleast four days before the preseason clash begins. The reason is that the chunk from the prize purse will vary according to the number of charted teams rostered. Moreover, the Daytona 500 is among the highest-paying races, so teams could lose big if a decision isn't met before the season-opener race, let alone the preseason runs.

The plaintiffs outlined that since holidays cannot be avoided; it would further reduce the already scarce timeline at the federal court's disposal.

---

#2. NASCAR allegedly removed the controversial clause to void the appeal against it

The counsel of 23XI Racing and FRM argued that after they filed a motion to appeal and expedite the process, NASCAR removed the controversial clause from their rulebook that refrained teams with an active lawsuit against the organization from running without a charter.

The plaintiffs pointed out a foul play by Jim France and Co., saying that they deliberately hindered the proceedings, as removing the anticompetitive clause would've made the appeal moot, which translates to no practical relevance.

---

#3. The preliminary injunction filed was to prevent irreparable harm and not about the open agreement

After NASCAR removed the lawsuit release clause from its rulebook, the organization slammed 23XI Racing and FRM for making baseless claims that they would lose out on potential sponsors and share from the prize purse, if they run as open teams next season.

However, the plaintiffs argued that their preliminary injunction request was to avoid the imminent irrecoverable harm, which according to their evaluation, would begin with the 2025 season, and not about the release clause previously present.

23XI Racing and FRM have been tangled in the fierce legal battle against NASCAR's monopolistic practices since October 2. It's worth mentioning that NASCAR said they have already prepared the 2025 roster, and don't want to include the plaintiffs as chartered teams.

However, Michael Jordan and Bob Jenkins aren't settling for NASCAR's treatment and are relentlessly following the legal course.