The US Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear Apple's bid to escape being found in contempt in its legal fight with Fortnite maker Epic Games after the iPhone maker was deemed in violation of a judicial order mandating sweeping changes to its lucrative App Store. According to reports from Bloomberg, the justices are expected to consider the appeal in the court's next term, which commences in October, with a ruling expected by June 2027. The Supreme Court had declined to hear appeals from both Apple and Epic in 2024, but Justice Elena Kagan declined a motion to stay the contempt ruling last month. This marks a significant escalation in the nearly seven-year legal battle between the tech giants. As reported by Bloomberg, the Supreme Court's order indicated it would not consider a second issue that Apple raised challenging the judge's decision to enter a so-called 'universal injunction' covering how the company dealt with all developers worldwide. Apple has denied violating any prior court orders and argued to the Supreme Court that it cannot be held in contempt for allegedly violating the 'spirit' of a court injunction but not an express provision. The case is being watched closely because it could reshape how Apple manages App Store fees globally, as regulators in the EU, Brazil, India, and the UK have all challenged Apple's control over iOS app distribution and payments.
The lawsuit by Cary, North Carolina-based Epic Games challenged Apple's control over transactions in applications that use the company's iOS operating system and its restrictions on how apps are distributed to consumers. As reported by Reuters, Apple and Epic have clashed for years over the rules governing Apple's App Store. Cupertino, California-based Apple mostly defeated Epic's lawsuit, but was required in a 2021 injunction issued by Oakland, California-based US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers to let developers include links in their apps directing users to non-Apple payment methods. This would have allowed developers to bypass the commission Apple typically takes. The dispute dates to 2020, when Epic sued Apple after its hit game Fortnite was removed from the App Store after Epic announced it was adding a direct payment option that bypassed the companies' native payment systems. The lawsuits challenged what Epic characterized as Google and Apple's monopolistic practices over the high commissions they charge developers and how difficult they make it for users to download third-party app store alternatives like the Epic Games Store. Google and Epic settled their beef earlier this year, with Epic CEO Tim Sweeney even agreeing to stop attacking Google's app store policies, while Apple's fight with Epic remains very much alive.
According to Reuters, Apple allowed the links but adopted new restrictions, including a 27% commission on developers for purchases made on payment systems outside the App Store within seven days of clicking a link. Apple charges developers a 30% commission for purchases within the App Store. Epic accused Apple of "malicious compliance" by instead charging developers up to 27% on sales made via links to third-party payment systems. In 2025, District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers found Apple in contempt of the 2021 ruling that required the company to let developers direct users to third-party payment options for in-app payments. An appeals court largely upheld the contempt ruling in December, though it struck down an order that prevented the company from charging commissions on external payments at all. The Ninth Circuit upheld the contempt finding in December 2025 but said barring Apple from collecting any commission at all went too far, ruling that Apple may charge a fee based on costs "genuinely and reasonably necessary" for coordinating external-link purchases. Commission rates for developers of apps on the App Store can range from 15% to 30%, and Apple says most developers pay no commission to Apple at all. Apple has not collected commission on external-link payments for nearly a year since the contempt ruling.
As reported by Reuters, Apple has denied violating the judge's order and argued to the Supreme Court that the injunction should not be applied to millions of developers beyond Epic Games. Apple told the Supreme Court in a filing that 'Regulators around the world are watching this case to determine what commission rate Apple may charge on covered purchases in huge markets outside the United States'. The San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in December upheld the judge's contempt finding but let Apple make new arguments about what commission it should be allowed to charge for digital goods bought in apps distributed through the App Store but paid for using third-party systems. However, the justices will not consider Apple's argument that the injunction requiring third-party payment options should not apply to developers other than Epic. The case is being watched closely because it could reshape how Apple manages App Store fees globally, as regulators in the EU, Brazil, India, and the UK have all challenged Apple's control over iOS app distribution and payments. The Supreme Court declined in May to pause the contempt order while Apple's appeal was pending, with Justice Elena Kagan denying the emergency stay request without referring it to the full bench, keeping the financial pressure on Apple, which has argued the order forces it to forgo billions of dollars in commission revenue.
'This is an important question of law, and we are pleased the Supreme Court will hear our case,' Apple stated in a filing to 9to5Mac. Epic posted on X: 'We're heading to the Supreme Court where we'll continue to fight against junk fees Apple charges on third-party payments. Lower courts have rightly found Apple's fees to be illegal and anticompetitive and we'll continue to defend free markets.' Epic stated that 'Lower courts have rightly found Apple's fees to be illegal and anticompetitive and we'll continue to defend free markets.' An Apple spokesperson told Engadget in a statement: 'This is an important question of law and we are pleased the Supreme Court will hear our case.' The companies continue to present opposing views on the legality and anticompetitive nature of Apple's fee structure in the ongoing legal battle. The compliance dispute that began with a single Fortnite update in August 2020 is now entering its seventh year of litigation, with no resolution in sight on the central question of what Apple can charge developers who send users outside the App Store. The Supreme Court declined in May to pause the contempt order while Apple's appeal was pending, with Justice Elena Kagan denying the emergency stay request without referring it to the full bench, keeping the financial pressure on Apple, which has argued the order forces it to forgo billions of dollars in commission revenue.
