Judge says Pentagon’s ‘attempt to cripple’ anthropology is disturbing

US Ministry It appears that the Department of Defense is illegally punishing Anthropists To try to restrict Use of artificial intelligence tools by the militaryU.S. District Judge Rita Lin said during Tuesday’s court hearing.

“It appears to be an attempt to cripple Anthropic,” Lin said of the Pentagon designating the company as a supply chain risk. “(The Department) appears to be penalizing Anthropic for attempting to bring public scrutiny into this contract dispute, which of course would be a violation of the First Amendment.”

Anthropic She filed two federal lawsuits Alleging that the Trump administration’s decision to designate the company as a security risk amounts to unlawful retaliation. The government placed the designation on Anthropic after it pushed for restrictions on how the military uses its AI. Tuesday’s hearing came in a case filed in San Francisco.

Anthropic is seeking a temporary order to temporarily halt the appointment. Anthropic hopes the relief will help convince some of the company’s employees Fickle clients To stay with her a little longer. Lynn can only pause if she decides that Anthropic is likely to win the overall case. It is expected to issue its ruling on the injunction in the next few days.

The dispute has sparked a broader public debate about how artificial intelligence should be deployed by the armed forces and whether Silicon Valley companies should consider the government in determining how to deploy the technology they develop.

The Ministry of Defence, also called the Department of War or DoW, Argue It followed procedures and appropriately determined that Anthropic’s AI tools could no longer be relied upon to perform as expected during critical moments. She asked Lin not to question her assessment of the threat she claims humans pose to national security.

“The concern is that Anthropic, instead of just raising concerns and responding, will say we have a problem with what the DoW is doing and will tamper with the program…so it doesn’t work the way the DoW expects and wants it,” Eric Hamilton, a Trump administration lawyer, said during Tuesday’s hearing.

Lynn said it was Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s role — not hers — to determine whether Anthropic was the right vendor for the department. But Lin said it was up to her to determine whether Hegseth violated the law by taking steps beyond simply canceling Anthropic’s government contracts. Lin said it was “concerning” to her that the security classification and guidance more broadly limiting use of Anthropic Claude’s AI tool by government contractors “did not appear to be tailored to stated national security concerns.”

As Anthropy’s dispute with the government escalated last month, Hegseth said Published on X “Effective immediately, no contractor, supplier, or partner doing business with the U.S. military may engage in any business activity with Anthropic.”

But on Tuesday, Hamilton acknowledged that Hegseth had no legal authority to prevent military contractors from using Anthropics for work unrelated to the Department of Defense. When Lane asked him why Hegseth would publish that, Hamilton said: “I don’t know.”

Lane also asked Hamilton whether the Pentagon had considered less punitive measures to wean the department away from using anthropic tools. She described supply chain risk classification as a powerful authority typically reserved for foreign adversaries, terrorists, and other hostile actors.

Michael Mongan, a Wilmer Hill attorney who represents Anthropic, said it was unusual for the government to go after a partner who was “stubborn” in negotiating the designation.

The Pentagon said it is working to replace human technologies over the coming months with alternatives from Google, OpenAI and xAI. It also said it had taken action to prevent Anthropic from engaging in such actions Any manipulation during the transitional period. Hamilton said he didn’t know if it was possible for Anthropic to update its AI models without getting permission from the Pentagon; The company says it is not.

A ruling in the other case, in a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., is expected soon without a hearing.