Denny Hamlin spent most of the day on the witness stand as NASCAR’s legal team launched an aggressive cross-examination in the ongoing antitrust trial, pressing him on past public comments, financial claims, and internal team decisions.
The exchanges grew tense as NASCAR attempted to portray Hamlin as inconsistent and financially irresponsible, while Hamlin countered that the sport’s culture forces drivers and owners to toe the company line publicly.
Cross-Examination Turns Heated As Denny Hamlin Rubbishes NASCAR’s Questions
According to courtroom reports, NASCAR’s attorneys focused heavily on Hamlin’s past public comments, including emails and podcast appearances, where he had previously praised NASCAR or the Next Gen car. The legal team attempted to frame Hamlin as inconsistent, arguing that his current criticisms contradict his previous public praise.
But Hamlin argued these comments were superficial and obligatory. He told the court that he often repeats “talking points to make fans happy” and avoid retaliation, noting, “Anytime I say anything negative, I get a phone call from NASCAR.”
Also Read: Kenny Wallace Uncovers Michael Jordan’s Powerful Advantage in 23XI’s War Against NASCAR
When a NASCAR lawyer suggested this meant he couldn’t be trusted publicly, Hamlin dismissed the claim, saying, “That’s nonsense.”
The cross-examination then shifted to the financial health of 23XI Racing, the team co-owned by Hamlin and Michael Jordan. The sanctioning body’s lawyers attempted to undermine Hamlin’s argument that 23XI Racing struggles financially under NASCAR’s system. NASCAR’s attorney asserted that 23XI is valued at $160.2 million, asking whether that constituted a “fair return” on its $10.7 million investment.
However, Hamlin fired back that his concern isn’t short-term valuation but building a sustainable, long-term operation capable of competing for decades.
NASCAR’s attorneys also introduced internal emails involving 23XI advisor Curtis Polk and Jordan’s financial team. The communications suggested concerns about Hamlin overspending, citing major expenditures such as the team’s third charter purchase and the construction of the Airspeed business facility.
To that, Hamlin countered that Polk’s role includes keeping his spending in check, framing the emails as evidence of normal internal oversight rather than mismanagement.
The heated cross-examination underscored the broader stakes of the antitrust trial: the struggle over who controls NASCAR’s economic ecosystem, the sanctioning body or the teams that invest millions to compete.
As Hamlin walked off the stand during a break in the session, the clash between NASCAR’s legal strategy and the driver’s unfiltered testimony left the courtroom and the racing community bracing for the upcoming confrontation.
As the trial continues, the gap between NASCAR and one of its most outspoken competitors could result in a clash that could influence not just the outcome of the court case but the future balance of power in the sport.