Apple escalates its multi-year legal battle with Epic Games to the nation's highest court, challenging a contempt ruling that strikes at the heart of its App Store business model.
Back
Apple asks Supreme Court to void 27% App Store fee ruling
Apple Inc. on Thursday petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a lower court's civil contempt finding, escalating a years-long antitrust battle with Epic Games that could reshape the App Store economy and its lucrative commission structure.
"Under that rule, the potent weapon of contempt turns on an amorphous, know-it-when-you-see-it inquiry that permits a court to impose contempt merely by declaring a violation of an order's 'spirit'," Apple argued in its petition, calling the standard a "recipe for abuse."
The dispute centers on a 2021 injunction requiring Apple to permit external payment links in the App Store. Apple complied but imposed a new 27% commission on purchases made through those links. A district court, in a decision later largely upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, found the fee violated the "spirit" of the order and held Apple in contempt.
At stake is a significant portion of Apple's high-margin services revenue. An unfavorable ruling could force Apple to allow developers to link out to alternative payment systems with minimal or no commission, setting a major precedent for other digital marketplaces like Google's Play Store. The Supreme Court is expected to decide whether to hear the case by early July.
A Challenge on Two Fronts
Apple's petition to the high court presents two main legal arguments. First, it contends that a party cannot be held in civil contempt for violating the "spirit" of an injunction; the order must be "clearly and unambiguously" violated. Apple maintains the original 2021 injunction only required it to allow links and did not explicitly prohibit charging a commission on resulting sales.
Second, the company argues the injunction's scope is illegal. It applies universally to all developers on the U.S. App Store, not just the plaintiff, Epic Games. Apple claims this contradicts the Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in Trump v. CASA, which limited the power of federal courts to issue such broad, nationwide injunctions. The filing notes that the order impacts competitors like Microsoft and Spotify, which have no connection to the original case.
The Road to the Supreme Court
The legal saga began in 2020 when Epic Games sued Apple over antitrust claims. While a judge mostly dismissed Epic's lawsuit, she issued the 2021 injunction on anti-steering rules. After Apple implemented its 27% fee, Epic challenged the move, leading to the contempt finding.
The 9th Circuit upheld the contempt ruling but also stated that Apple could make arguments for what a "reasonable" commission should be. Dissatisfied with a court potentially setting its fee structure, Apple is now seeking a full reversal from the Supreme Court. The justices have previously declined to hear appeals from either side in this case in January 2024, but Apple is hoping the specifics of the contempt ruling present a legal question compelling enough for the court to take up.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.
