CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) — Michael Jordan has had a lifetime of big moments. His latest came on the witness stand in a federal courthouse.
The retired NBA great testified Friday against NASCAR in an antitrust case he is pursuing against the stock car series on behalf of his race team, 23XI, along with Front Row Motorsports. Both want to force NASCAR to change the way it does business with its teams, accusing it of monopolistic behavior.
“Someone had to step forward and challenge the entity,” the soft-spoken Jordan told the jury. “I felt I could challenge NASCAR as a whole."
It was a different role for the 62-year-old Jordan, known best for the six NBA titles he won with the Chicago Bulls and his business interests in retirement, including his still relatively new role as a NASCAR team co-owner with three-time Daytona 500 winner Denny Hamlin. 23XI is a combination of Jordan's longtime jersey number and Hamlin's race care number.
Dressed in a dark blue suit, Jordan slowly headed to the stand for the afternoon session, adjusted the seat for his 6-foot-6 frame and settled in. Those in the packed courtroom hung on every word.
Jordan said he grew up a NASCAR fan, attending races at 11 or 12 with his family at tracks in Charlotte and Rockingham in his home state but also at Darlington in South Carolina and the Talladega superspeedway in Alabama.
“We called it a weekend vacation,” he said.
There were moments of levity on a dramatic day of testimony that also included Heather Gibbs, the daughter-in-law of team owner and NFL Hall of Fame coach Joe Gibbs. People were turned away from the courtroom and U.S. District Judge Kenneth Bell couldn't help but notice the high attendance in front of him as well as an overflow room nearby.
“I take it Mr. Jordan is the next witness,” Bell quipped.
Outside the courthouse in downtown Charlotte, a crowd gathered for the first time this week for a chance to see Jordan. One woman screamed “Oh My God, Mike! You are an icon, you the best, you the best to do it in the NBA!” Another claimed to have played golf and cards with Jordan acquaintances while asking Jordan to pose for a photo with his daughters.
Jordan said, “Man, it's cold out here for you guys,” before complimenting the two girls on their Nike-branded hoodies.
A spectator held a sign that read "NASCAR Your Fans Deserve Better" and Hamlin turned to him and said “You're right” as they tried to make their way through the throng to a caravan of waiting SUVs.
On the witness stand, Jordan noted he was an early fan of Richard Petty, like his dad. He later gravitated to Cale Yarborough, “the original No. 11. Sorry, Denny,” Jordan testified as Hamlin watched from the gallery.
Jordan was asked to outline his career, noting his time with the Bulls and adding he remains a minority owner of the Charlotte Hornets. Did he play anywhere else?
“I try to forget it but I did,” said Jordan, who played for the Washington Wizards in a mostly forgettable return to the NBA after his championship runs with the Bulls and a brief time playing minor league baseball.
But Jordan spent most of his time making clear why he was in court suing the series he loves over the charters that guarantee teams revenue and access to Cup Series races. Among other things, the plaintiffs want the charters made permanent, which NASCAR has balked at.
“Look, we saw the economics wasn’t really beneficial to the teams,” Jordan testified, adding: “The thing I see in NASCAR that I think is absent is a shared responsibility of growth as well as loss.”
As the session wound down, defense attorney Lawrence Buterman noted the novelty of cross-examining an icon like Jordan, closing with the comment: “Thank you for making my 9-year-old think I’m cool today.”
“You’re not wearing any Jordans today,” Jordan replied. When he was dismissed from the stand, he said "whew” and made his way back to the seat in the front row he's occupied all week.
AP auto racing: https://apnews.com/hub/auto-racing
Michael Jordan arriving to federal courthouse to testify in NASCAR antitrust case on Friday, Dec. 5, 2025 in Charlotte, N.C. (AP Photo)
FILE - Michael Jordan, co-owner of 23XI Racing, sits in his pit box during a NASCAR Cup Series auto race at Talladega Superspeedway, Sunday, Oct. 6, 2024, in Talladega, Ala. (AP Photo/ Butch Dill, File)
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. military opened fire on two people clinging to the wreckage of a boat allegedly carrying drugs, congressional lawmakers learned this week as they seek more answers about the attack and the legal underpinnings of President Donald Trump's military campaign in international waters near Venezuela.
The Sept. 2 strikes on an alleged drug boat were the first foray by the U.S. military into blowing up vessels allegedly carrying drugs. But this particular attack and the broader military campaign, which so far has destroyed more than 20 boats and killed more than 80 people, is now under intense scrutiny. Lawmakers who oversee national security committees heard this past week from the Navy admiral who ordered the initial strikes, including the follow-up that killed the two survivors.
While Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley stated clearly that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth did not issue a “kill them all” order on the survivors, Democratic lawmakers say the scope of the mission was clear — to destroy the drugs and kill the 11 people on board. It's a deadly new tactic the Trump administration says is intended to deter the flow of drugs to the U.S. The lawmakers and military experts say the sequence of events is alarming, potentially violating the laws of armed conflict that safeguard human rights and protect American troops.
Late Friday, the AP confirmed that lawmakers were told the boat was headed to link up with another vessel bound for Suriname, according to a person familiar with the situation who agreed to discuss it on the condition of anonymity. The information was first reported by CNN. Another person said it was heading south when it was struck.
What lawmakers learn in the weeks ahead, and how far they are willing to press the administration for answers, presents a defining moment for the U.S. military under Trump's second-term command. It is testing the scope of laws that have long governed soldiers on the battlefield and will almost certainly influence the course of the tense standoff between Trump's White House and the government of Venezuela.
Here’s what’s known about the boat strikes and what other information lawmakers are still pursuing.
Bradley told lawmakers that he ordered a second attack on the wreckage of a boat that was carrying cocaine because it was believed that bales of the drug were still in the hull of the boat, according to a person with knowledge of the briefing who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it.
For several minutes, two people, shirtless and at one point waving, had climbed on the piece of the boat that was still floating.
They were “drifting in the water — until the missiles come and kill them,” said Rep. Adam Smith, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, adding that their slaying was “deeply concerning.”
However, Sen. Tom Cotton, the Republican chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he believed the video shows the two people trying to flip over the piece of the boat. For him, that was enough of an indication that the survivors were trying to “stay in the fight” and were therefore still justifiable targets.
Bradley told the lawmakers that the rationale for the second strike was to ensure that the cocaine in the boat could not be picked up later by cartel members. Lawmakers previously had been told the second strike was ordered to sink the boat.
That rationale grows out of the legal opinion that the Department of Defense is using as the entire basis for its military operation against drug cartels, especially because Congress has not explicitly authorized the Trump administration to conduct the campaign.
Under the Trump administration's legal opinion, drugs and drug smugglers en route to the U.S. are essentially viewed as terrorist threats and can be targeted with the same rules that apply to the global war on terror.
That's a dramatic shift from traditional practice that views drug running as a serious criminal crime, but one to be handled typically by law enforcement, usually the Department of Homeland Security's Coast Guard, rather than the military.
“The people in the boat, as a matter of the law of armed conflict, are not fighters,” said Michael Schmitt, a former Air Force lawyer and professor emeritus at the U.S. Naval War College. “All they are is transporting drugs.”
Democrats say the conclusions of the Trump administration's legal argument are troublesome. “That incredibly broad definition, I think, is what sets in motion all of these problems about using lethal force and using the military,” Smith said.
That's led lawmakers to call for the public release of the legal argument that undergirds the military campaign, a roughly 40-page opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.
“This briefing confirmed my worst fears about the nature of the Trump administration’s military activities,” Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Armed Services committee, said in a statement. “This must and will be the only beginning of our investigation into this incident.”
The Office of Legal Counsel's opinion, which has been classified by the Trump administration and was only made available to lawmakers in November, was signed on Sept. 5, according to lawmakers who have reviewed it. The attack in question, however, was conducted three days before, on Sept. 2.
Lawmakers want to know under what orders and instructions the operation was conducted.
Bradley told lawmakers this week that he had not personally read through the entire legal opinion, according to the person with knowledge of the briefing. And while Hegseth has said that military lawyers, known as judge advocate generals or JAGs, were kept in the loop on the operation, lawmakers found out Thursday that the JAGs for special operations command and southern command, the two command posts for the operation, did not have access to the legal opinion until mid-November.
Bradley also told lawmakers that the orders did not contain a directive to kill all the boat occupants, and Cotton pointed out that the military was still operating under the same orders when it picked up the survivors of a later, separate attack.
Lawmakers on the armed services committees are requesting the written execute order for the operation, which would include the rules of engagement that soldiers were expected to follow. Democratic lawmakers also want to understand what Hegseth communicated verbally to military officials, either by reviewing a transcript of his remarks or interviewing those involved.
The armed services committees also want to hear from Navy Adm. Alvin Holsey, who is retiring as the commander of U.S. forces in Central and South America. He had been commanding the overall campaign, but Hegseth announced last month that Holsey would be retiring early.
Lawmakers also want to find out why Hegseth was not in the operation room when the second strike was carried out. He has said he stepped out for other business after the first strike.
So far, Hegseth has been defiant in the face of criticism from Capitol Hill. Just after the briefings concluded Thursday, the military announced that it had struck another boat that it believed was carrying drugs, killing four people. That latest strike, the 22nd of the campaign, brought the death toll to at least 87 people.
Associated Press writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Ben Finley in Washington contributed.
Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, leaves after meeting with Adm. Frank "Mitch" Bradley, commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command, and Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a classified briefing at the Capitol in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 4, 2025. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., speaks to reporters following a classified briefing for top congressional lawmakers overseeing national security as they investigate how Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth handled a military strike on a suspected drug smuggling boat and its crew in the Caribbean near Venezuela Sept. 2, at the Capitol in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 4, 2025. (AP Photo/Kevin Wolf)
U.S. Navy Adm. Frank M. Bradley, right, accompanied by Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, left, walks to a meeting with senators on Capitol Hill, Thursday, Dec. 4, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)
