Judge Finds Trump Administration Acted Unlawfully Against AI Firm Anthropic

A US federal judge has ruled that the Department of Defense of the Trump administration acted unlawfully when it targeted AI company Anthropic after the company refused to allow some military uses of its technology.

US District Judge Rita Lin described the Pentagon’s decision to label Anthropic a supply-chain risk as “illegal and baseless.” She also said that national security cannot be used as a reason to punish companies or organisations for expressing concerns about government policy.

The ruling follows a lawsuit filed by Anthropic, the company behind the Claude AI chatbot. Anthropic argued that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had exceeded his authority by taking action against the company.

Judge Finds Trump Administration Acted Unlawfully Against AI Firm Anthropic

The conflict began after Anthropic rejected certain proposed uses of its AI models by the US military. The company said its technology could not safely support weapons systems and opposed using its models for domestic surveillance.

Anthropic said these restrictions were based on concerns about safety and civil rights.

The Pentagon took a different position. Officials argued that private technology companies should not be able to place limits on military operations. The department also questioned whether Anthropic could control how the military used its technology under government contracts.

In February, the Pentagon designated Anthropic as a supply-chain risk. The US government generally uses this designation for companies linked to countries it considers security threats.

Anthropic became the first publicly known US company to receive this designation.

See Also: Anthropic Tests More Capable Model 2 Internally, But Has No Public Release Plans

Judge Says Government Went too Far

Judge Lin found that the Defense Department had acted unlawfully by ordering companies working with the military to stop doing business with Anthropic.

She said national security does not give the government unlimited power to punish companies that disagree with it.

The judge had already raised concerns about the government’s actions during an earlier stage of the case. At that time, she said the government appeared to be trying to weaken Anthropic and discourage public discussion about the military use of AI.

She described the case as potentially involving retaliation under the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech in the United States.

The AI company also argued that the government’s actions damaged its business and violated its constitutional rights.

Anthropic Welcomes the Ruling

Anthropic welcomed the latest decision and said it remains interested in working with the US government on national security applications of AI.

A company spokesperson said Anthropic wants to work with the government to use AI in ways that can benefit Americans while addressing security concerns.

The ruling could have wider implications for the growing relationship between AI companies and the US military. As governments increasingly look to advanced AI systems for defence and national security, technology companies are likely to face difficult decisions over how their models can be used.

The Pentagon and White House had not provided comments on the ruling at the time of the report.

The case also highlights a larger debate over whether AI developers should be able to place restrictions on military applications of their technology, particularly when those restrictions involve autonomous weapons, surveillance and other sensitive uses.