The Department of Justice’s lawsuit against Apple, filed last year, is moving into a new phase after several major legal developments in August twenty twenty-five. The Department of Justice, led by Attorney General Merrick Garland and Antitrust Division head Jonathan Kanter, is pressing ahead with allegations that Apple has illegally monopolized the smartphone market and stifled competition and innovation, particularly through its App Store policies.

On Tuesday, August twelfth, Apple faced fresh controversy when Elon Musk accused the company of giving unfair advantages to OpenAI’s chatbot, ChatGPT, over his competing Grok app in the App Store. Musk called Apple’s actions an “unequivocal antitrust violation” and threatened further legal action. OpenAI’s chief executive, Sam Altman, pushed back, arguing the claim was “remarkable.” Apple promptly denied the accusations and emphasized its App Store is designed to be fair and impartial, with recommendations and charts determined by algorithm and expert curation. Critics quickly pointed out that non-OpenAI apps like DeepSeek and Perplexity have reached the top of the App Store charts, undercutting Musk’s assertion.

Meanwhile, the core Department of Justice case continues to reshape the landscape. Apple suffered a significant loss in June when the federal district court in New Jersey refused to dismiss the case. That decision keeps Apple on track for a high-profile trial, likely sometime in twenty twenty-six. The Department of Justice argues that Apple’s control over which apps can run on iPhones, along with its policies that limit developers’ ability to direct users to outside payment options, are harming both consumers and rivals. Apple has countered that its restrictions are essential for user security and privacy, and that its practices result in superior user experiences and more opportunities for developers. So far, judges have let the government’s case proceed.

Apple executive Tim Cook and other company leaders continue to defend their approach, publicly repeating that Apple is building products with privacy, security, and innovation in mind. Antitrust experts say Apple faces an uphill fight. The courts, informed by recent decisions in other tech antitrust cases—including one this summer against Google—are showing a clear interest in bold, forward-looking remedies. For instance, in July, the Ninth Circuit Court affirmed strong remedies forcing Google to open its Android app ecosystem to more competition, hinting at what could be in store for Apple if the Department of Justice prevails.

Major wins for Apple have been limited so far in the Department of Justice case, but the company can take some comfort in the fact that earlier rulings in its Epic Games battle stopped short of calling it a monopolist and largely supported its right to control app distribution on iPhones. That said, a parallel case forced Apple to permit developers to include links to external payment options, weakening the Apple payment monopoly and echoing one of the Department of Justice’s most prominent arguments.

As the case advances, legal experts project several possible outcomes, ranging from forced changes to App Store rules, sizable fines, or even more radical remedies such as requiring Apple to allow third-party app stores. Each would have a ripple effect across the entire industry, potentially lowering costs for developers and consumers while making it easier for new competitors to enter.

Industry observers see the case as a defining test for digital platform antitrust enforcement. If the Department of Justice wins, it could set a broad precedent for how regulators can intervene in the design and operation of Big Tech platforms, affecting not just Apple but every company with a walled-garden approach to hardware and software. If Apple wins, it would bolster the argument that tight integration is good for consumers, not just for...