In a stunning critique on his podcast, Dale Earnhardt Jr. has cast serious doubt on NASCAR’s intentions in its ongoing charter lawsuit settlement efforts. The sanctioning body recently brought its premier Cup Series team owners to the table, using their declarations against 23XI and Front Row Motorsports in the legal tussle.
Yet on Monday, the stock car racing giant made a surprising reversal, calling for a court-mediated agreement in the dispute. What does this imply? According to Earnhardt Jr., the organization’s latest move seems more about optics than actual justice.
What Did Dale Earnhardt Jr. Reveal About NASCAR’s Court Reversal?
The high-profile antitrust case between NASCAR and the two teams, scheduled for its final trial on December 1, has hit a standstill. In its latest filing, the sanctioning body conceded that earlier efforts to resolve it, including a round of court-mandated mediation, have proven unsuccessful.
However, citing 23XI co-owner Michael Jordan’s August comments, the governing body is now pushing for a court-assisted ceasefire, signaling to the opposing parties that it is open to a settlement under the right terms.
Weighing in on the matter, Earnhardt, himself a NASCAR team owner, addressed the issue on his “Dale Jr. Download” podcast, “Was this really nothing more than NASCAR going ‘By the way, we do want a settlement…you know, not that we think one’s going to happen, but we just want people to know that we’re not against the settlement.’ I think that’s a big thing is public perception.”
Hinting at what might be happening behind the curtains, the two-time Daytona winner added, “It’s just a reminder, I think, more than anything of, by the way, like, ‘You know, we’re not over here. We will settle under the right terms, right? We’re totally down with that. Not even expecting it to happen, but just so that the public knows.’ And that maybe could be what this is.”
In essence, NASCAR’s latest push for a settlement appears to be as much about optics as outcome. By publicly championing the idea of negotiation, the sanctioning body positions itself as open to compromise, a stance that could earn it favor in the court of public opinion.
Still, while NASCAR has pointed to its summary judgment filing as proof that a resolution remains possible before the trial, it has made little indication of revisiting the existing charter terms.
Meanwhile, Jordan had previously expressed a willingness to explore settlement options following the August hearing. Yet, attorneys representing both 23XI and FRM have since clarified that their clients are fully prepared to see the case through in court if a fair agreement isn’t reached.
In closing, the teams have pushed back against NASCAR’s request, arguing that “starting over” with a new mediator would make a resolution even less likely. As both sides dig in, the clash now shifts toward the next key date, October 21, when the court will hear the organization’s motion for summary judgment. This ruling could determine whether the case moves forward or ends before the December trial.