U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan on Tuesday rejected an attempt by computer giant Apple to join the newest chapter in its long-running legal fight with Epic Games, the maker of the famous video game Fortnite.
Kagan – who handles, at least initially, emergency requests from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit – denied an application.
(Bombshell ruling on mail in ballots)
Apple had filed a stay of a civil contempt order entered by a lower court against the company, the court said in a one-sentence email sent to reporters by the court’s Public Information Office.
Advertisement
The disagreement centers on an antitrust complaint Epic Games filed against Apple, challenging Apple’s restrictions on in-app purchases made through its App Store.
(Trump pushes new 2028 Republican — not JD Vance)
A federal judge determined Apple cannot stop developers from trying to get their customers to buy games and other products from them on rival app shops instead of through Apple’s App Store.
The judge then ruled that Apple was in contempt of that order because it (among other things) took steps to make it harder for developers to encourage customers to go outside the App Store and imposed a large commission on purchases made through third-party systems after a link in the App Store was clicked.
Advertisement
On Monday, Apple took its case to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to step in.
Before this Court can decide whether to grant review and hear oral argument in the appeal that Apple plans to file, a stay is now needed to prevent Apple from having to litigate its commission rate under a mistaken and prejudicial contempt label—proceedings that could reshape the app market worldwide.
Epic Games, meanwhile, asked the justices to leave the fight alone. “Apple’s willful contempt,” it stated, “has effectively stymied the restoration of competition for over two years, allowing it to collect billions of dollars in what the Ninth Circuit has previously affirmed were supracompetitive fees.”
Epic’s opposition to Apple’s stay request was sent to reporters less than an hour before Kagan refused Apple’s request without sending it to the whole court – and before Apple had a chance to file a response. It was not a close call.
The Supreme Court made headlines earlier this week in a separate case when the justices declined to hear an appeal from Gonzaga and NBA legend John Stockton in his lawsuit against the Washington Medical Commission and the Washington State Office of the Attorney General over sanctions imposed on doctors for COVID-19-related misinformation.
Advertisement
The case was among dozens that the court declined to take up, not explain its decision, the Spokesman-Review reported on Tuesday.
John Stockton, a critic of pandemic-era policies and vaccine mandates, filed the lawsuit in 2024 alongside several physicians.
The complaint argued that rules in place during the pandemic restricted doctors from speaking out against what it described as the “mainstream” COVID-19 narrative.
The doctors involved had faced state discipline for unprofessional conduct after publishing opinion pieces and blog posts questioning the effectiveness of COVID-19 testing and vaccines and promoting alternative treatments.
The lawsuit contended that the disciplinary actions violated the physicians’ First Amendment rights and were unconstitutionally vague, the report said.
Advertisement
One of the plaintiffs, retired ophthalmologist Richard Eggleston, faced state sanctions after writing an opinion piece published in the Lewiston (Idaho) Tribune that was reported by a reader. Following an investigation, Eggleston was charged with unprofessional conduct in August 2022.
Another plaintiff, Thomas Siler, was also charged with unprofessional conduct after the Washington Medical Commission received complaints about COVID-related content he had posted on his blog, said the Spokesman-Review.
Lawyers for the Washington State Office of the Attorney General last month asked that the case be dismissed, arguing that recent state court rulings had rendered the appeal moot.
In April, the Washington Supreme Court declined to review a separate case in which the Washington Court of Appeals ruled that the First Amendment bars the Washington Medical Commission from disciplining doctors over COVID-19 treatment and prevention information published online.
The decision not to take the case allowed that ruling to stand.
This article may contain commentary
which reflects the author’s opinion.
