Apple asked the US Supreme Court on May 21, 2026, to review a lower court ruling that found it in civil contempt for charging developers fees on outside purchases made through links in the App Store [1, 2, 3]. The contempt order stems from a 2021 injunction that required Apple to let developers include links in their apps to external payment methods outside the App Store’s system [1, 3].
While Apple complied by allowing external payment links, it imposed a 27% commission fee on purchases made through these alternative systems within seven days of clicking the link [1, 3]. The judge found this fee violated the injunction and held Apple in contempt in 2025 [1]. The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that contempt finding last December but allowed Apple to further argue about the commission’s amount in trial court [1, 3].
Apple argues the injunction should not apply broadly to all developers because Epic Games is the sole plaintiff and this was not a class action lawsuit. The company states, "Epic never brought a class action and never attempted to show that enjoining Apple's conduct against all other developers…was somehow necessary to provide relief to Epic" [1, 3]. Apple also contends it cannot be held in contempt for violating the "spirit" of the injunction when the order did not explicitly ban commissions on external payments [1, 3].
Epic Games filed its lawsuit against Apple in 2020 seeking to loosen App Store control over transactions and app distribution [1, 3]. While a judge mostly dismissed Epic’s case, the 2021 injunction mandated Apple allow outside payment links [1, 3]. Epic sharply criticized Apple’s Supreme Court petition, calling it "one last Hail Mary to delay a conclusion to this case and avoid opening up the gates to payment competition for the benefit of consumers" [1].
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court denied Apple’s request to pause ongoing lower court proceedings in the matter [1, 3]. Around the same time, Epic announced that Fortnite is back in the App Store globally, except in Australia, indicating confidence the court favors greater payment competition [3].
The Supreme Court will now consider whether to take up Apple’s petition challenging both the contempt finding and the injunction’s scope, with further proceedings expected in the lower courts thereafter.
