Supreme Court Denies Apple Stay in Epic App-Store Contempt Case

Justice Elena Kagan on Wednesday declined Apple’s request for an emergency stay of a Ninth Circuit contempt ruling, leaving the appeals court decision in place and returning the case to U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland.

The dispute traces to 2020, when Epic Games added its own payment system to Fortnite to avoid Apple’s App Store commissions. Apple removed the game from the App Store and Epic sued, leading to a 2021 trial on antitrust and App Store rules.

After the trial, Judge Gonzalez Rogers issued an anti-steering injunction that barred Apple from preventing developers from directing users to external payment options. In April of last year the judge found Apple had deliberately violated that injunction. The Ninth Circuit later upheld the contempt finding and denied Apple’s request to suspend the contempt ruling.

Apple asked the Supreme Court to pause the contempt finding while it sought further review. Kagan’s denial means the lower-court rulings remain in effect and the matter returns to the federal court in Oakland for further proceedings.

Before the contempt determination, Apple was collecting about a 27% fee on payments routed off the App Store, slightly below the company’s standard 30% fee for in‑App payments. Since the contempt ruling, Apple has not collected commissions on transactions completed through external links for nearly a year. Apple told the court the change cost it billions in revenue.

Epic opposed Apple’s emergency request. In its filing the company wrote, “Apple’s willful contempt has successfully delayed the restoration of competition by more than two years, allowing it to reap billions of dollars in what the Ninth Circuit previously affirmed were supracompetitive fees.” Epic CEO Tim Sweeney accused Apple of using legal filings to delay enforcement of the injunction.

Judge Gonzalez Rogers will now decide whether Apple may impose commissions on purchases completed via external link redirections and whether additional remedies are warranted for the prior conduct. During earlier proceedings the judge notified federal prosecutors about possible criminal referrals and concluded some Apple executives provided false testimony about compliance.

Apple won on several claims at the 2021 trial, and the Supreme Court declined to take certain appeals in January 2024. The anti-steering order that allowed external payment links has been the central legal loss for Apple and the subject of subsequent contempt litigation. Fortnite returned to the U.S. App Store in 2025 after earlier court developments favored Epic.

Apple’s petition for certiorari, filed in early April asking the Supreme Court to review the contempt label and the injunction’s scope, remains pending. The case will continue in federal court in Oakland as judges consider the scope of Apple’s obligations and potential remedies.