Anthropic argues that the government acted in response to the company’s publicly stated AI safety restrictions.
“The Secretary of War branded Anthropic — an American AI company whose models help defend the nation— a national-security ‘supply chain risk’ because it declined to permit its models to be used for mass surveillance of Americans or lethal autonomous warfare and publicly explained those AI-safety commitments,” Anthropic’s attorneys wrote. “A divided panel upheld that extraordinary designation.”
The company sued the Trump administration seeking to reverse the Pentagon’s action. In September, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit ruled 2-1 against Anthropic, rejecting its claims that the restrictions on Claude were arbitrary, exceeded the department’s authority and violated the Constitution.
Anthropic is now asking for the case to be reheard, arguing that the earlier ruling failed to account for evidence supporting its retaliation claim.
The court ignored “straightforward evidence the designation was retaliation for Anthropic’s speech about AI safety,” the company’s attorneys wrote in Tuesday’s filing.
The D.C. case is unfolding alongside separate litigation in San Francisco. In August, a federal judge there found that the Defense Department violated Anthropic’s First Amendment rights and determined that the supply chain risk designation constituted unlawful retaliation.
Anthropic had previously worked with several U.S. government agencies, including the Defense Department. The company signed a $200 million Pentagon contract in July 2025. Negotiations later began over bringing Claude to the department’s GenAI.mil platform, but those discussions broke down in September.
The Pentagon’s subsequent designation prevents contractors from using Anthropic technology when carrying out work for the department.
The legal fight marks a significant reversal in Anthropic’s relationship with the Pentagon after the company had been an early AI partner for the federal government.
An Anthropic representative declined to comment beyond the new court filing. A Pentagon spokesperson told CNBC that the department does not comment on pending or ongoing litigation.
This analysis is based on reporting from CNBC.
Image courtesy of Ayala Law.
This article was generated with AI assistance and reviewed for accuracy and quality.
