The NASCAR charter trial delivered its most dramatic day yet on Friday, featuring hours of revealing testimony from top NASCAR officials, a key team owner, and one of the most recognizable figures in sports.

What unfolded in the courtroom was a complicated combination of business disagreements, emotional recollections, and at times, sharp exchanges over the sport’s future and who should control it.

Steve O’Donnell, NASCAR’s COO, completed his testimony first.

He maintained that the non-compete clauses and the goodwill provision in the charter system existed because NASCAR needed something in return for offering teams guaranteed revenue and guaranteed entry into races.

Ensuring teams would not compete against NASCAR, he said, helped solidify the broader partnership, especially while trying to land the best possible broadcast deal.

O’Donnell repeatedly defended NASCAR’s decision not to offer permanent charters, saying the series needed flexibility given “unknowns” around schedules, revenue, technology, and costs.

He also acknowledged that outside bidders like Andretti Global had at one point shown interest in entering the Cup Series with Honda.

At another point, he noted that private equity involvement in team ownership had been something NASCAR originally hoped to avoid, but teams pushed for it.

Much of the cross-examination focused on whether NASCAR meaningfully continued negotiating with the teams leading up to last September’s deadline.

Lawyers revisited issues involving non-compete language and the broader struggle over long-term structure.

O’Donnell portrayed the desire for alignment: being “all in together,” he said, was essential for reaching the best media deal and maximizing enterprise value.

He cited the increasing charter valuations as proof that confidence in the sport remains high, despite ongoing litigation.

Discussions about a cost cap and cost floor surfaced again, with O’Donnell estimating sentiment among teams to be split roughly in half.

Larger organizations like Penske, Hendrick, or Gibbs might be less enthusiastic, he suggested, while mid-tier teams are more receptive.

He referenced Formula 1 as an example of how cost controls can raise team values but acknowledged that some NASCAR teams fall below a potential cost floor and don’t want to be forced into additional spending.

When asked about the Team Negotiating Committee’s four-pillar proposal, O’Donnell said its estimated cost—around $720 million, based on roughly $20 million per car—seemed unworkable compared with NASCAR’s own revenue picture.

He questioned what, under that plan, would even be left for track payouts.

There were also reminders of recent tensions. O’Donnell said the SRX Series alarmed him from an intellectual property standpoint, citing Chase Elliott racing a NAPA-sponsored car with a stylized No. 9.

He also admitted frustration over exchanges with the teams’ Curtis Polk, calling one meeting the most difficult he’s had in NASCAR.

In re-examination, lawyers even referenced private messages implying not all NASCAR executives showed team owners respect, though the jury was not provided details.

After O’Donnell, Heather Gibbs of Joe Gibbs Racing took the stand.

Her testimony was brief but filled with emotion. It marked the first time she publicly spoke about becoming a co-owner at JGR following her husband Coy Gibbs’ sudden passing.

She explained that the team did not want to sign the 2025 charter agreement but ultimately felt forced to do so when told they risked losing their charters entirely.

“Don’t do this to us,” Joe Gibbs pleaded with Jim France, she recalled.

According to Heather, France responded that he was “done with the conversations” and that he would live with however many charters he woke up with the next morning.

She said the final draft arrived at 5 p.m. with a one-hour deadline, contained numerous grammatical errors, and lacked guarantees about broadcast revenue for the next seven years.

In the moment, she said she could only think of Coy and JD Gibbs and the legacy of the family business—one she feared would vanish if they didn’t sign.

It felt, she said, like NASCAR was “holding a gun to our heads.”

After lunch, the courtroom turned its attention to Michael Jordan. The NBA legend and 23XI Racing majority owner testified for an hour that was calm, candid, and occasionally humorous.

He described himself as both a passionate fan and an engaged owner who relies heavily on longtime advisor Curtis Polk to stay informed on the business.

He said he attends 10 to 12 races a year and watches the rest on TV, never missing a race.

Jordan said he entered NASCAR wanting to win, which motivated the purchase of a third charter despite ongoing tension.

He leaned on comparisons to NBA business, where franchise value grows through controlled, limited entry and shared revenue.

He said he found NASCAR’s system “unfair” and believed the charter agreement needed a compromise that treated teams as genuine partners.

He also said he received legal advice that the no-sue provision in the proposed charter deal could amount to an antitrust violation.

He stressed multiple times that he wasn’t afraid to challenge the status quo.

“It needed to be looked at from a whole different perspective, and that’s why we are here,” he told the court.

Cross-examination introduced texts between Jordan and Polk in which Polk said the teams planned to be a “pest” in negotiations and leak information to the media.

Jordan simply responded with a thumbs-up emoji. Lawyers also highlighted Jordan’s private messages praising the work of the France family, which Jordan acknowledged.

He said he respected NASCAR’s history but wanted to push the sport to evolve into a true partnership.

Jordan expressed support for giving drivers and teams more credit and security, noting the lack of a union and the risks drivers take.

“I never saw Jim France drive a car or risk his life,” he said.

He also objected to NASCAR’s Driver Promotion Agreement, suggesting it limits teams’ control of their intellectual property without proper compensation.

A lighter moment ended his testimony, as NASCAR attorney Lawrence Buterman thanked Jordan for making his nine-year-old think he was cool.

Jordan noticed Buterman wasn’t wearing his usual sneakers and joked about him not wearing Jordans, drawing laughter from the courtroom.

The day closed with examination of RTA director Jonathan Marshall, a slower and more methodical stretch after the headline-making testimonies.

Before dismissing the jury, Judge Bell warned them that the trial might not wrap up next Friday as initially planned, acknowledging the burden on them and thanking them for their ongoing service.

After the jury exited, the judge called attorneys Jeffrey Kessler and Chris Yates into chambers for a stern sidebar, another sign of how intensely this case is being managed.

The day delivered a clearer picture of the deep philosophical divide between teams and NASCAR: questions about control, revenue, risk, respect, and the future direction of the sport.

With more witnesses still to come, the trial shows no signs of cooling off.