The Trump administration will not rule out further action against Anthropology

In the first anthropy Court session Hard penalties imposed by the Trump administration, the AI ​​technology startup asked the government to commit to not imposing additional sanctions on the company. This did not happen.

“I am not prepared to make any commitments on this case,” James Harlow, a Justice Department lawyer, told U.S. District Judge Rita Lynn via video conference on Tuesday.

In fact, the government is preparing to take another step aimed at marginalizing the company from dealing with federal agencies. President Trump is currently finalizing an executive order that would formally ban the use of human tools across government, according to a White House person familiar with the matter but not authorized to discuss it. Axios Reported for the first time On plan.

Tuesday’s hearing stemmed from one of the two federal cases Anthropic foot against the Trump administration on Monday, claiming the government had unconstitutionally designated it Supply chain risks And turning it into a pariah industry in the field of technology. Billions of dollars In revenue Anthropic is now in jeopardy, with existing and potential clients pulling out of deals and demanding new terms, according to the company.

Anthropic is seeking a preliminary injunction to suspend the risk identification and prevent management from taking further punitive action against the company.

The purpose of Tuesday’s court appearance was to decide on the timeline for the preliminary hearing, and Anthropic is looking to hold it soon to prevent further damage to its business. Michael Mongan, an anthropological attorney at WilmerHale, told Lane he was less concerned about delaying the matter until April if the Trump administration could commit to not taking additional action. “The defendants’ actions cause irreparable injuries, and these injuries are increasing by the day,” Mongan said.

After Harlow declined, Lane moved the hearing date forward to March 24 in San Francisco, although that timeline was still later than Anthropic wanted. “The case is very important on both sides, and I want to make sure I’m deciding on a quick record but also a complete record,” the judge said.

The timeline for the other case, located in Washington, D.C., has been put on hold while Anthropic pursues an administrative appeal to the Department of Defense, which is expected to fail on Wednesday.

The months-long dispute between the Pentagon and Anthropic began when the artificial intelligence startup refused to sign off on the military’s use of its existing technology for any legitimate purpose, which it feared would include widespread surveillance of Americans and missile launches without human supervision. The Ministry of Defense confirms that decisions on use are within its authority.

Many lawyers with expertise in government contracts and the U.S. Constitution believe that the administration’s action against Anthropic represents a pattern of abuse of the law to punish perceived political enemies, including universities, media companies, and law firms (e.g. wilmerhillthe company that represents Anthropy). Experts believe that anthropology should prevail, but the challenge is to overcome the deference that courts often pay to national security arguments made by the government, especially during a period of repression. War times.

“If this is a one-time event, you might give the president some respect,” says Harold Hongjo Koh, a professor at Yale Law School who worked in Barack Obama’s presidential administration. He wrote On the anthropological issue. “But now, this is clearly the latest in a series of events related to the punitive presidency.”

David Soper, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center who studies the Constitution, says the provisions the Defense Department used to punish anthropologists were designed to protect the country from potential subversion by its enemies.