BN
TechAI Desk•2 views

Supreme Court Declines to Pause Apple's App Store Contempt Ruling

The U.S. Supreme Court declined on May 4, 2026, to pause a judicial order that found Apple in contempt related to its App Store practices. The dispute stems from an antitrust lawsuit filed by Epic Games, the creator of *Fortnite*. The core conflict involves Apple's control over in-app transactions and commission rates. While Apple was initially required to allow third-party payment links, the subsequent commission structure—charging 27% for external payments versus 30% internally—led to a contempt finding against Apple. The Supreme Court's decision leaves the existing contempt ruling in place, despite Apple's appeal efforts.

Ad slot
Supreme Court Declines to Pause Apple's App Store Contempt Ruling

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected Apple's request to temporarily halt a judicial order that found the company in contempt regarding mandated changes to its App Store. This decision marks a significant development in the long-running antitrust battle between Apple and Epic Games.

Supreme Court's Ruling on App Store Dispute

On May 4, 2026, the Supreme Court declined to pause the ruling issued by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. This ruling found Apple in contempt concerning the ongoing litigation initiated by Epic Games, the developer of Fortnite.

Justice Elena Kagan, speaking on behalf of the court, denied Apple's motion for a stay. Apple had sought the delay to gain more time to file a full appeal of the Ninth Circuit's decision.

Background of the Antitrust Litigation

The core of the dispute centers on the rules governing transactions within Apple's App Store, which has been a point of contention for years.

  • Epic Games' Initial Lawsuit: Epic Games filed litigation in 2020, aiming to reduce Apple's control over transactions within apps running on iOS and to challenge distribution restrictions.
  • Initial Injunction: Although Apple largely prevailed in the initial suit, a 2021 court injunction required Apple to allow developers to include links directing users to non-Apple payment methods.
Ad slot

Commission Structure Conflict

The dispute escalated over the commission rates applied to these transactions:

  • App Store Purchases: Apple charges developers a 30% commission for purchases made directly within the App Store.
  • Third-Party Payments: Apple implemented new restrictions, imposing a 27% commission on developers for purchases made through payment systems outside the App Store, provided the purchase occurred within seven days of clicking a link.

Epic Games argued that this 27% commission violated the terms of the earlier injunction. Consequently, in 2025, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers found Apple in civil contempt for violating the injunction.

Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court Proceedings

The Ninth Circuit upheld the contempt finding in December, but it also permitted Apple to present new arguments regarding the appropriate commission rate for digital goods bought via third-party payment systems.

  • Apple's Defense: Apple contended that the injunction should not apply to the millions of developers beyond Epic Games and argued that the ruling should not dictate rates in international markets.
  • Epic's Argument: Epic Games maintained that allowing Apple to circumvent the original injunction would enable the company to continue profiting unfairly at the expense of consumers and developers.
Ad slot