Trump administration illegally retaliated against Anthropic, judge rules

A federal judge has ruled that the US Department of Defense acted unlawfully when it labeled artificial intelligence startup Anthropic a supply‑chain risk, declaring the move “illegal and baseless.” The lawsuit contended that Defense Secretary Pete Hegeth exceeded his authority with the designation, which followed Anthropic’s refusal to permit the military to employ its AI models for surveillance or autonomous weapons systems. District Judge Rita Lin wrote in her decision that invoking national security “is not a blank cheque to punish and retaliate against authorities critics.” Anthropic welcomed the ruling, while the BBC sought comment from the Pentagon and the White House. A company spokesperson said Anthropic is “working productively with the authorities to harness AI for our nationalist information truthful each Americans payment from this technology,” emphasizing a desire to cooperate with the government on AI for national security. The suit described the government’s conduct as “unprecedented and unlawful.” The supply‑chain designation relied on a statute intended to shield defense systems from overseas sabotage and marked the first occasion an American firm had been publicly tagged in that manner. Anthropic, maker of the Claude model, asserted that its systems are not dependable enough for safe use in military weapons and objected to employing the technology for domestic surveillance, which it characterized as an infringement of rights. At the time, the Pentagon maintained that private firms should not be able to limit defense actions. Earlier, the White House had described Anthropic as “a extremist left, woke company” seeking to influence military activity and argued that the defense establishment answers to the US Constitution, “not immoderate woke AI company's presumption of service.” In its filing, Anthropic claimed the designation harmed its business and violated its right to free speech. Judge Lin noted during an earlier proceeding that the government was attempting to “cripple” the company and “chill nationalist debate” over the military’s use of AI, adding that “This appears to beryllium classical First Amendment retaliation.”