Apple has formally asked the United States Supreme Court to review a series of rulings that led to changes to App Store login rules and fees in the United States.
See also: Apple intensifies war against fraud in the App Store
In 2021, Apple largely won its legal battle with Epic Games, but Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ordered Apple to relax its anti-guidance rules and allow developers to link to alternative payment options in apps. Apple complied, but imposed a 12 to 27 percent on external links instead of the usual 15 to 30 percent fee.
Considering the fees charged by payment processors, there was little or no discount for developers, and few chose to participate. Apple also limited the design of the buttons, allowing developers only a simple text link.
Epic Games went back to Gonzalez Rogers and said that Apple had violated the court order, and she agreed. In April 2025, Apple was found in contempt by the court for willful violation of that 2021 order. Apple was then prohibited from collecting any fees for links in the US App Store, and it has not collected money for external links in third-party apps since then.
Apple appealed, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that Apple was in contempt, but said the company should be able to charge a reasonable fee for its intellectual property. Apple doesn't want the courts to decide what fees it can collect, so it's now asking the Supreme Court to review the case.
Apple has two main issues with the appeals court’s decision. First, it says that holding it in civil contempt was inappropriate because the original order did not prevent it from charging developers when they linked to third-party payment options. The district court and the appeals court agreed that Apple violated the “spirit” of the order by imposing a high fee. The company argues that previous court decisions have held a party in civil contempt only when an order has been “clearly and unequivocally” violated. A contempt order based on the “spirit” is “a recipe for abuse,” Apple says.
See also: Fortnite returns to the App Store worldwide
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 reinforces this understanding by requiring clarity in orders to ensure clear notice. The Ninth Circuit’s spirit-based inquiry is at odds with these requirements. Under this rule, the powerful weapon of contempt rests on a vague, know-it-when-you-see-it inquiry that allows a court to impose contempt simply by stating a violation of the “spirit” of an order.
As it has done in many other court filings, Apple also cites Trump v. CASA, a ruling that said lower courts do not have the authority to issue blanket injunctions to block national policies. Apple says the court order requiring it to remove the fees for all developers goes far beyond the scope of the Epic Games, and any relief ordered by the court should be limited to Epic Games.
However, the injunction here bars Apple from charging fees to millions of registered developers worldwide who are not parties to this case. It does so even though Epic never filed a class action lawsuit and never attempted to show that prohibiting Apple’s conduct from all other developers — such as Microsoft or Spotify, which have no ties to Epic — was somehow necessary to provide Epic with relief.
According to Apple, the contempt ruling based on “spirit” and the order that applies to all developers “have combined to create an order that could reshape the global app marketplace.”
Apple wants the appeals court's decision to be overturned in its entirety, without any judicial interference with the fees it imposes. If that's not possible, Apple argues that any order should apply only to Epic Games and not to all developers who offer apps through the US App Store.
Epic Games and Apple have agreed to an expedited schedule, and Apple's application will be heard on June 25. Apple expects a decision on whether the Supreme Court will hear the case by the time the justices take a summer break in late June or early July.
See also: Apple is working on introducing apps with AI Agents to the App Store
Apple previously asked the Supreme Court to hear its legal battle with Epic Games in January 2024, but the justices declined to hear the case. Justice Elena Kagan also recently denied Apple's request to stay the fee order while Apple waits to hear from the Supreme Court.
