Trump administration argues Pentagon’s Anthropic ban is justified, lawful - The Hill
The Trump administration's legal defense of the Pentagon's Anthropic ban amounts to a simple argument: what Anthropic did was not speech.
The Trump administration's legal defense of the Pentagon's Anthropic ban amounts to a simple argument: what Anthropic did was not speech. The company refused to remove safety restrictions on its AI — that is conduct, not protected expression — and the government is free to stop doing business with anyone for any reason that is not itself constitutionally protected.
The Justice Department filed that defense in California federal court on Tuesday, responding to Anthropic's lawsuit challenging its designation as a national security supply chain risk. The filing asserts the action was "justified and lawful" and that Anthropic is unlikely to succeed on its First Amendment claim.
"It was only when Anthropic refused to release the restrictions on the use of its products — which refusal is conduct, not protected speech — that the President directed all federal agencies to terminate their business relationships with Anthropic," the filing said. "No one has purported to restrict Anthropic's expressive activity."
The administration argues the dispute stems from contract negotiations and national security concerns, not retaliation for any message Anthropic has disseminated. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth designated Anthropic a supply chain risk on March 3 after months of negotiations reached an impasse over two restrictions: Anthropic would not allow its Claude AI to be used for autonomous weapons or domestic surveillance of Americans. The company said those positions are matters of principle. The administration called them endangering American lives.
Anthropic's counterargument is that the restrictions themselves are expressive — a statement about what the company believes AI should and should not be used for — and that the government cannot condition a business relationship on the company abandoning that statement. The company sued on March 9, alleging the designation violated its free speech and due process rights and that the government failed to follow required procedures.
Legal experts who spoke to Reuters in March said Anthropic appeared to have a reasonably strong case, particularly on the procedural claims. The preliminary injunction hearing is scheduled for Tuesday.
In a statement, Anthropic said it was reviewing the government's filing: "Seeking judicial review does not change our longstanding commitment to harnessing AI to protect our national security, but this is a necessary step to protect our business, our customers, and our partners."
The administration separately designated Anthropic under a different law that could expand the order across the entire government — a move Anthropic is challenging in a D.C. appeals court. President Trump backed Hegseth's move, which Anthropic executives have said could cost billions in lost sales this year.
Sources:
