Anthropic sues feds over Pentagon's 'supply chain risk' label

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — Leading artificial intelligence developer Anthropic sued the federal government on Monday, arguing it retaliated against the Bay Area business for maintaining its foundational principles.

In its federal suit, Anthropic says its primary principle is centered on the most capable AI systems being the safest and most responsible. It held tightly to that belief about “Claude,” its flagship family of AI models, when telling President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth Claude can’t safely or reliably be used for autonomous lethal warfare and surveilling Americans.

Trump then directed all federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s technology, despite the Department of Defense already agreeing to the tech business’ conditions. Within hours, the Pentagon designated Anthropic a supply chain risk to national security and prohibited government agencies from doing business with it.

“These actions are unprecedented and unlawful,” Anthropic says. “The Constitution does not allow the government to wield its enormous power to punish a company for its protected speech. No federal statute authorizes the actions taken here.”

Anthropic asks a judge to declare that Trump overstepped his authority and violated the First and Fifth Amendments. It also wants to stop the government from complying with Trump’s order.

According to Anthropic, it previously developed AI models to help the Pentagon protect national security and is reportedly its most widely used model. The tech business has always said Claude should never be used for lethal autonomous warfare and the mass surveillance of Americans. It has no confidence that Claude would be reliable or safe if it supported such warfare.

However, Anthropic says Hegseth demanded it set aside those restrictions in favor of a new policy. It agreed, except for its two critical principles.

“The department met Anthropic’s attempts at compromise with public castigation,” it says. “It labeled Anthropic’s CEO as too ‘ideological’ and a ‘liar’ with a ‘God-complex’ who ‘is ok putting our nation’s safety at risk.’”

Trump’s retaliation came Feb. 27, after Anthropic said it couldn’t meet the Pentagon’s demands. Trump in a social media post directed government agencies to stop using Anthropic’s technology, calling it a “radical left, woke company,” it says.

Anthropic says no government official had previously said it posed a supply chain risk to national security. In fact, Pentagon officials have told the press that Hegseth’s order stemmed from ideology instead of risk, Anthropic claims.

The president’s directive has irreparably harmed the business, putting current and future contracts in doubt — jeopardizing hundreds of millions of dollars, Anthropic says.

“On top of those immediate economic harms, Anthropic’s reputation and core First Amendment freedoms are under attack,” it adds. “Absent judicial relief, those harms will only compound in the weeks and months ahead.”

Anthropic calls the retaliation against it arbitrary and capricious. It’s also facing harm for making First Amendment-protected speech. Additionally, it faces a violation of its Fifth Amendment rights because it had no due process before its reputation and business prospects were deprived.

Anthropic argues the defendants, which include the Pentagon, Treasury Department and several others, seek to destroy its economic value. They want to punish Anthropic for holding onto its views.

The government offered two choices: forego its founding principles about safe AI or get punished, it says.

“The consequences of this case are enormous,” Anthropic says. “The federal government retaliated against a leading frontier AI developer for adhering to its protected viewpoint on a subject of great public significance — AI safety and the limitations of its own AI models — in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States.”

Attorneys for Anthropic couldn’t be reached for comment.

A Pentagon spokesperson told Courthouse News that it doesn’t comment on ongoing litigation.