A U.S. federal court has issued a landmark ruling, finding the Pentagon's actions against Anthropic unlawful. Judge Rita Lin annulled the "supply chain threat" status that the military agency had assigned to the AI developer and overturned all resulting restrictions. This is not merely a legal formality but a serious blow to attempts by the state to use administrative levers to pressure technology companies.
The court's key argument is that the conflict arose not from the technical unreliability of the Claude chatbot or Anthropic's inability to fulfill government contracts. The root of the dispute is the company's public stance on acceptable use cases for AI. Judge Lin directly stated that such measures are a response to the company's views, which directly contradicts the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, guaranteeing freedom of speech.
Moreover, the court found a procedural violation: Anthropic was not given the opportunity to review the claims in advance and contest them. This, according to Lin, violates the due process guarantees enshrined in the Fifth Amendment. The ruling took effect immediately, although the administration of President Donald Trump retains the right to appeal.
Context of the confrontation
Recall that the spark of the conflict flared over the terms of Claude's use by the military. Anthropic allowed its models to be used in national security, but categorically refused to lift bans on mass surveillance of American citizens and fully autonomous weapons systems. As early as February, the Pentagon issued an ultimatum, demanding the removal of all restrictions for "any lawful purposes," and threatened to blacklist the company. After CEO Dario Amodei refused, the threat was carried out, followed by Trump's executive order to cease federal use of Anthropic's technologies within six months.
This precedent has already impacted the entire industry. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, who struck his own deal with the Pentagon, publicly urged the military not to blacklist Anthropic and later even admitted that certain aspects of his agreement were flawed. Notably, despite the formal ban, Anthropic's technologies continued to be used—for example, the U.S. NSA deployed the Mythos model in April.
This ruling is a powerful signal for the market. It creates a legal precedent that protects AI companies from politically motivated pressure disguised as national security concerns. However, it is too early to relax: the administration's appeal could drag out the process, and the situation itself exposes the fragile balance between ethical constraints in AI and state interests. Investors and developers should closely monitor the development of this case—it will define the rules of the game for years to come.