.jpg){kind=link}
The U.S. Supreme Court has refused Google’s request to temporarily block parts of a lower court ruling requiring the company to reform its Play Store operations.
Google had sought to delay enforcement of the order, which mandates opening its Android ecosystem to greater competition, including allowing third-party app downloads, enabling alternative app stores, and permitting developers to use their own in-app payment systems outside Google’s billing framework.
If enacted, the reforms will allow Android users to download applications directly from developers’ websites and make payments at prices set independently by developers, bypassing the Play Store altogether.
The Supreme Court did not provide an explanation for its decision. A Google spokesperson told Business Insider:
“Android offers more options to users and developers than any other mobile operating system, and the changes ordered by the U.S. District Court will put users’ ability to download apps safely at risk. Although we are disappointed that the order was not stayed, we will continue with our appeal.”
The case stems from a 2020 lawsuit filed by Epic Games, which accused Google of monopolising the distribution of Android apps and in-app payment processing.
In December 2023, a California jury ruled in favour of Epic Games, concluding that Google’s Play Store policies breached U.S. antitrust law. Following the verdict, a federal judge ordered Google to open its Android platform to competing app stores and allow developers to use independent payment systems for a period of three years.
In July 2025, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ruling. Two months later, in September, Google petitioned the Supreme Court to suspend enforcement of parts of the order while pursuing a full appeal. The Supreme Court has now denied that request.
As a result, Google must comply with the lower court’s directives by 22 October, unless its ongoing appeal is successful.
Apple’s App Store has faced a similar antitrust challenge from Epic Games. The company lost its own appeal in the Ninth Circuit to pause enforcement, and some of the required changes—such as allowing external payment links—are already in effect.