Justice Kagan denied Apple's bid to pause a contempt ruling over its 27% App Store commission, forcing remedies litigation while cert proceedings begin.
Justice Elena Kagan, acting for the full Supreme Court, denied Apple's emergency request to stay a Ninth Circuit ruling that found the company in civil contempt of a 2021 antitrust injunction [1]. The denial, issued May 6, 2026, leaves the contempt designation intact and compels Apple to participate in lower-court proceedings to determine what commission rate it may charge on purchases made through external payment links in its App Store [2].
The underlying dispute traces to Epic Games' 2021 lawsuit challenging Apple's App Store rules as anticompetitive. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers issued an injunction that year barring Apple from restricting developers from including external payment links. Apple subsequently imposed a 27% commission on purchases completed through those links [1]. The Ninth Circuit affirmed that the commission structure violated the injunction and upheld the civil contempt finding. Apple then sought emergency relief from the Supreme Court, arguing the contempt label was unwarranted because the 2021 injunction did not explicitly address commissions at all [2].
Kagan's denial means Apple must now proceed in the district court's remedies phase, where a judge will assess the permissible bounds of any commission Apple may collect on external transactions, even as Apple prepares a full petition for certiorari [1]. The contempt finding travels with the company through that process, a procedural posture that distinguishes this phase from a routine fee dispute. Contempt carries independent reputational and legal consequences, and any remedies order issued under that cloud will carry additional enforcement weight [2].
The stakes extend well beyond the immediate commission rate. Regulators in the European Union, South Korea, and other jurisdictions are monitoring how U.S. courts define the permissible perimeter of App Store gating practices [1]. A district court ruling that constrains Apple's commission to a figure significantly below 27% could provide a persuasive benchmark for foreign enforcement actions already underway. Apple's global App Store revenue runs into the tens of billions of dollars annually, making even incremental shifts in commission policy consequential at scale [2].
Apple's next formal move is a petition for certiorari. If the court grants review, the justices would consider both the contempt finding and the underlying scope of the 2021 injunction. Until then, the remedies proceeding in the Northern District of California moves forward under the contempt designation that Apple has so far been unable to dislodge [1].