Aren't Apple actually arguing against themselves?
Hang on. So Apple are arguing that they should be entitled to preserve the sanctity of their App store and its 30% cut, which is justified because they vet apps in order to protect their customers' data (and children's data!).
And that they have the right to kick Epic off the store, because Epic submitted (and Apple approved) a wildly popular app which contained an entire payment mechanism as a Trojan horse .... thus demonstrating that Apple's much vaunted scrutiny isn't nearly as thorough as they claim.
At least Epic's hidden functionality was clearly designed to be very publicly visible once activated and spark a confrontation with Apple.
How many other apps might there be on the app store which secretly harvest customers' data (and children's data!).
If anything, Apple's line of argument just proves that the security they supposedly provide doesn't actually exist, and thus the 30% is completely unjustified?