Judge questions Pentagon's motives for labeling Anthropic as a security threat in battle over AI

“What is troubling to me about these these actions is they don’t seem to be tailored to the national security concerns,” Lin said.

Lin is being asked to issue an emergency order to remove a stigma that Anthropic alleges was unjustifiably applied as part of an “unlawful campaign of retaliation” that provoked the San Francisco-based company to sue the Trump administration earlier this month. Anthropic has also filed a separate and more narrow case in the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C

Although Lin expressed abouts about how Trump administration has treated Anthropic, she didn't issue a ruling Tuesday. Instead, the judge asked for the lawyers in the two sides to file further evidence in the case by Wednesday and indicated she would rule before the end of this week.

The issues underlying the rift extend beyond a contractual dispute between one of technology's biggest AI laboratories and the Trump administration.

The feud has also mushroomed into a showdown over the boundaries surrounding a rapidly evolving technology that could turn into a massive jobs killer, a lethal military weapon and an invasive spy.

“It's a fascinating public policy debate, but it's not my role to decide who is right in that debate,” Lin observed at the outset of Tuesday's hearing. The judge instead said she is focusing on whether the Trump administration acted improperly by applying a scarlet letter on Anthropic that traditionally has only been slapped on companies connected to foreign adversaries such as China or Russia.

Besides being deemed a security risk, Anthropic also contends it was tarnished on social media in a Feb. 27 statement from President Trump that blasted the company as part of the “radical, woke left.” The president also immediately ordered all federal employees to stop using Anthropic's technology, including its increasingly popular Claude chatbot.

Trump gave a longer period of six months for the Pentagon to phase out Anthropic’s technology, which is already embedded in classified military platforms including those used in the Iran war.

That Feb 27 post, along with another by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on the same date, raised the specter of Anthropic losing key other deals, even though the administration has since backed away from a broad government ban in filings made in this case and other documents.

But Anthropic lawyer Michael Mongan argued during Tuesday's hearing that Anthropic's reputation already had been stained by the Trump's administration's actions, requiring a court order to prevent further damage threatening the company's future growth.

“Anthropic has suffered irreparable and mounting injuries,” Mongan told Lin.

While acknowledging that the Trump administration made some procedural mistakes along the way to declaring Anthropic as a security risk, Justice Department lawyer Eric Hamilton maintained the company “revealed itself to be an untrustworthy and unreliable partner in recent negotiations.”

Hamilton also maintained that the administration should be given “substantial deference” in determining what qualifies as a security risk.

The Defense Department “will continue to direct its operations without tech company influence,” Hamilton asserted.

——

O'Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island.