A federal judge ruled Thursday that the Pentagon’s blacklisting of artificial intelligence company Anthropic was “illegal and baseless,” finding that the Trump administration retaliated against the company for exercising its First Amendment right to publicly oppose the military’s use of AI in surveillance and autonomous weapons.
U.S. District Judge Rita Lin issued a 59-page order in the Northern District of California finding that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth overstepped his authority when he designated Anthropic a national security supply-chain risk, a label typically reserved for companies that expose military systems to foreign sabotage.
A First-of-Its-Kind Punishment
The case stems from Anthropic’s refusal to allow the military to use its AI chatbot Claude for U.S. surveillance or autonomous weapons. Anthropic has argued that AI models are not reliable enough to be safely deployed in weapons systems and that domestic surveillance would violate Americans’ civil rights. The Pentagon countered that private companies should not be able to constrain military operations.
Hegseth’s designation, announced earlier this year, was the first time a U.S. company had been publicly labeled a supply-chain risk under an obscure government procurement statute. The move blocked Anthropic from certain military contracts, and company executives warned it could cost billions of dollars in lost business and reputational harm.
Anthropic sued on March 9, calling the designation “unlawful, unsupported by facts and inconsistent with the military’s past praise of Claude.” The company alleged violations of both the First Amendment, which protects free speech, and the Fifth Amendment, which guarantees due process. Anthropic said it was never given a chance to dispute the designation before it took effect.
“Punishing Anthropic for bringing public scrutiny to the government’s contracting position is classic illegal First Amendment retaliation,” Lin wrote in her ruling.
Judge Rejects National Security Argument
The government argued that the designation stemmed from Anthropic’s refusal to accept contractual terms, not its views on AI safety. But Lin disagreed, writing that “the record supports an inference that Anthropic is being punished for criticizing the government’s contracting position in the press.”
The judge found that the administration’s actions did not appear to be directed at legitimate national security interests but were instead motivated by a desire to punish Anthropic for its public stance against the military’s AI agenda. Lin temporarily blocked enforcement of the designation, though she gave the administration seven days to appeal before the ruling takes effect.
Lin also blocked enforcement of a separate Trump social media directive that had ordered all federal agencies to stop using Anthropic and its chatbot Claude. That directive was seen as a further escalation of the administration’s campaign against the company, which had already been excluded from certain government contracts.
Anthropic spokesperson Danielle Cohen said the company was pleased with the decision. “While this case was necessary to protect Anthropic, our customers, and our partners, our focus remains on working productively with the government to ensure all Americans benefit from safe, reliable AI,” Cohen said in a statement.
Broader Implications for AI and Government
The ruling carries significant implications for the relationship between the federal government and the technology sector, particularly as AI companies increasingly grapple with questions about how their products should be used by the military. The case raises fundamental questions about whether the government can punish a company for publicly opposing a policy position on matters of national defense.
Anthropic has a second lawsuit pending in Washington, D.C., over a separate Pentagon supply-chain risk designation that could lead to its exclusion from civilian government contracts. That case remains ongoing and could further test the boundaries of government authority over AI companies that refuse to comply with military directives.
The Justice Department has argued that Anthropic’s refusal to lift restrictions could cause uncertainty in the Pentagon over how it could use Claude and risk disabling military systems during operations. The government’s position reflects a broader tension between the tech industry’s growing influence and the military’s desire to adopt cutting-edge AI capabilities for defense purposes.
The ruling comes at a time when the U.S. government is racing to maintain its technological edge over China and other adversaries in the development and deployment of artificial intelligence. How courts balance national security interests against companies’ constitutional rights will shape the future of government AI procurement and the broader relationship between Silicon Valley and the Pentagon for years to come.
discussion