In a legal twist, Apple has referenced a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision on birthright citizenship in its ongoing battle with Epic Games, arguing that lower courts may have overstepped their jurisdiction in issuing a nationwide injunction.

Background: The Epic vs. Apple Saga

The clash between Apple and Epic Games began in 2020 when Epic implemented its own in-app payment system in "Fortnite," violating Apple’s App Store guidelines. Apple responded by removing Fortnite from the App Store, prompting Epic to file an antitrust lawsuit. In 2021, a federal judge ruled that Apple must allow developers to direct users to alternative payment options—an injunction Apple has repeatedly challenged.

A Constitutional Argument Enters the Fray

In a fresh appeal, Apple’s legal team has cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Rahimi (2024), which clarified the limits of federal judicial power. Though the ruling pertained to the 14th Amendment and citizenship, Apple argues it supports the notion that lower courts shouldn’t issue broad injunctions that functionally act as nationwide policy changes.

Apple’s Legal Strategy: Redefining Injunction Authority

Apple contends that the injunction against its App Store policies—secured by Epic in the Ninth Circuit—imposes overly broad mandates without legislative or executive oversight. By referencing the citizenship ruling, Apple suggests courts should not wield national authority from the bench, especially in disputes affecting the tech ecosystem on a massive scale.

Legal Experts Weigh In

Legal scholars have mixed opinions. Some say Apple’s use of the citizenship ruling is a stretch, while others see it as a savvy move to test the boundaries of federal court influence over the private sector. “Apple is not arguing the core of the case, but questioning who gets to decide how broad these rulings can be,” said a Stanford legal analyst.

What’s at Stake for Developers and Consumers

Should Apple succeed, the ruling could curb the ability of developers to bypass Apple's payment system—impacting billions in revenue across the mobile app industry. Consumers may also lose easier access to alternative payment methods within iOS apps. Conversely, if Epic’s injunction stands, it could usher in sweeping changes for how platforms manage app payments and developer freedom.

Looking Ahead: A Battle Beyond Tech

This case now transcends app store policies, touching on constitutional interpretations and the balance of power between branches of government. A decision either way will likely influence future regulatory actions in the tech industry.