CHARLOTTE, N.C. — NASCAR argued in its latest court filing that Michael Jordan is suing the stock car series to earn a permanent charter that no other teams possess, and that neither 23XI Racing nor Front Row Motorsports has suffered any harm by racing as “open” entries.

NASCAR also indicated in its 34-page response filed late Monday that it has buyers interested in the six charters that have been set aside as a federal judge decides if the two teams can have them back for the remaining 11 races of this season. NASCAR is prepared to immediately begin the process of allocating the charters elsewhere.

These latest arguments are part of the ongoing federal antitrust lawsuit filed by 23XI and Front Row against NASCAR in a fight over charters, which are essentially franchise tags. 23XI, owned by retired basketball Hall of Famer Michael Jordan and three-time Daytona 500 winner Denny Hamlin, and Front Row, owned by entrepreneur Bob Jenkins, were the only two organizations out of 15 not to sign extensions on new charter agreements.

All the teams were fighting to have the charters made permanent during more than two years of extension negotiations, but NASCAR refused and its final offer was through 2031. 23XI and Front Row won a temporary injunction to be recognized as chartered as the case heads toward a Dec. 1 trial date.

The injunction was eventually overturned, appealed by the teams, and U.S. District Judge Kenneth Bell will hear arguments Aug. 28 on the matter. 23XI and Front Row as “open” teams do not receive the same financial percentages as chartered teams.

A rulebook change in July after the chartered status was stripped from the two organizations ensured that the six cars aren’t in danger of not qualifying for a race; starting spots are guaranteed to the 36 chartered cars in every 40-car field.

“Mr. Jordan has said he wants to use the litigation to grant him a permanent Charter that no other team has,” NASCAR alleged.

23XI and Front Row have maintained they will continue to race even if they must do so as open teams. NASCAR has argued that when the two organizations did not sign the extensions they lost all rights to charters and the sanctioning body should be free to move them.

“Plaintiffs’ theoretical inability to obtain Charters post-trial also does not justify NASCAR from selling or transferring Charters, because Plaintiffs do not have Charters now because of their own strategic choice,” NASCAR said in its filing. “Plaintiffs had multiple opportunities to acquire 2025 Charters, and they squandered them.”

NASCAR also argued that a court cannot order the private company into a partnership with teams it is not interested in doing business with. Another argument by NASCAR is that 23XI and Front Row have not been harmed by not being chartered because their drivers have not left the team and the rule change protects them from missing races; Tyler Reddick of 23XI has clauses in his contract that he can leave if his car is not chartered.

Additionally, NASCAR said it pays teams a higher percentage than even Formula 1 does and that its payout structure to teams proves it is not a monopoly because it was increased first by 28% in the 2016 charter agreement, and then by 62% in the 2025 agreement.

“NASCAR pays Teams more than even Formula 1 as a percentage of profit,” NASCAR said. “Plaintiffs ignore the pay raises the Teams received. Instead, they focus on a text during negotiations for the 2025 Charter that said an internal version of the May 2024 draft contained ‘zero wins’ for Teams.

“Plaintiffs ignore that the actual May 2024 draft proposed to Teams carried forward the biggest win for the Teams — a massive pay increase — that was set out in the December 2023 draft. It also gave Charter holders an opportunity to obtain any improved extension terms NASCAR offered to third parties and increased Teams’ ability to receive investor funding, among other benefits.”

Ukrainians have given a lukewarm reaction to this week’s White House summit.

There is bafflement and unease here after US President Donald Trump switched sides to support his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, dropping calls for a ceasefire and proposing that Ukraine surrender territory.

While allies are talking up the prospects of progress, people here remain unconvinced.

Ukraine war latest – Trump rules out using US troops

The Trump administration’s contradictory statements on possible security guarantees are causing concern here.

MP Lesia Vasylenko told Sky News it is not at all clear what the allies have in mind.

“Who is going to be there backing Ukraine in case Russia decides to revisit their imperialistic plans and strategies and in case they want to restart this war of aggression?”

For many Ukrainians, there is a troubling sense of deja vu.

In the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine agreed to give up not land but its nuclear arsenal, inherited from the Soviet Union, in return for security assurances from Russia and other powers.

They know how that ended up to their enormous cost. Putin reneged on Russia’s side of the bargain, with his invasion of Crimea in 2014 and once again with his full-scale attack three and a half years ago.

We met veteran Ukrainian diplomat Yuri Kostenko, who helped lead those negotiations in the 90s.

He said there is a danger the world makes the same mistake and trusts Vladimir Putin when he says he wants to stop the killing, something Mr Trump said he now believes.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈        

“It’s not true, it’s not true, Russia never, never, it’s my practices in more than 30 years, Russia never stop their aggression plans to occupy all Ukraine and I think that Mr Trump, if he really believes Mr Putin, it will be a very big mistake, Mr Trump, a very big mistake.”

Before the Alaska summit, allies agreed the best path to peace was forcing Mr Putin to stop his invasion, hitting him where it hurts with severe sanctions on his oil trade.

But Mr Trump has given up calls for a ceasefire and withdrawn threats to impose those tougher sanctions.

Instead, he has led allies down a different and more uncertain path.

Read more on Sky News:
Putin wasn’t there, but influenced summit
Peace further away, not closer
Five takeaways from White House talks

Ukrainians we met on the streets of Kyiv said they would love to believe in progress more than anything, but are not encouraged by what they are hearing.

While the diplomacy moves on in an unclear direction, events on the ground and in the skies above Ukraine are depressingly predictable.

Russia is continuing hundreds of drone attacks every night, and its forces are advancing on the front.

If Vladimir Putin really wants this war to end, he’s showing no sign of it, while Ukrainians fear Donald Trump is taking allies down a blind alley of fruitless diplomacy.

Ukrainians have given a lukewarm reaction to this week’s White House summit.

There is bafflement and unease here after US President Donald Trump switched sides to support his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, dropping calls for a ceasefire and proposing that Ukraine surrender territory.

While allies are talking up the prospects of progress, people here remain unconvinced.

Ukraine war latest – Trump rules out using US troops

The Trump administration’s contradictory statements on possible security guarantees are causing concern here.

MP Lesia Vasylenko told Sky News it is not at all clear what the allies have in mind.

“Who is going to be there backing Ukraine in case Russia decides to revisit their imperialistic plans and strategies and in case they want to restart this war of aggression?”

For many Ukrainians, there is a troubling sense of deja vu.

In the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine agreed to give up not land but its nuclear arsenal, inherited from the Soviet Union, in return for security assurances from Russia and other powers.

They know how that ended up to their enormous cost. Putin reneged on Russia’s side of the bargain, with his invasion of Crimea in 2014 and once again with his full-scale attack three and a half years ago.

We met veteran Ukrainian diplomat Yuri Kostenko, who helped lead those negotiations in the 90s.

He said there is a danger the world makes the same mistake and trusts Vladimir Putin when he says he wants to stop the killing, something Mr Trump said he now believes.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈        

“It’s not true, it’s not true, Russia never, never, it’s my practices in more than 30 years, Russia never stop their aggression plans to occupy all Ukraine and I think that Mr Trump, if he really believes Mr Putin, it will be a very big mistake, Mr Trump, a very big mistake.”

Before the Alaska summit, allies agreed the best path to peace was forcing Mr Putin to stop his invasion, hitting him where it hurts with severe sanctions on his oil trade.

But Mr Trump has given up calls for a ceasefire and withdrawn threats to impose those tougher sanctions.

Instead, he has led allies down a different and more uncertain path.

Read more on Sky News:
Putin wasn’t there, but influenced summit
Peace further away, not closer
Five takeaways from White House talks

Ukrainians we met on the streets of Kyiv said they would love to believe in progress more than anything, but are not encouraged by what they are hearing.

While the diplomacy moves on in an unclear direction, events on the ground and in the skies above Ukraine are depressingly predictable.

Russia is continuing hundreds of drone attacks every night, and its forces are advancing on the front.

If Vladimir Putin really wants this war to end, he’s showing no sign of it, while Ukrainians fear Donald Trump is taking allies down a blind alley of fruitless diplomacy.