Anthropic vs Pentagon: Judge rules in favour of AI company, says US govt acted ‘illegally’; all you need to know

A US judge has ruled in favour of AI company Anthropic in its legal battle with the Pentagon, finding that the government's actions against the company were illegal. The ruling comes after Anthropic challenged its designation as a supply chain risk.

Swati Gandhi
Updated28 Aug 2026, 10:22 AM IST
A collage depicting artificial intelligence company Anthropic and the US Pentagon as they engage in a legal battle.
A collage depicting artificial intelligence company Anthropic and the US Pentagon as they engage in a legal battle.(REUTERS)

In a major breakthrough for artificial intelligence (AI) company Anthropic, a US federal judge on Thursday (local time) ruled in favour of the company in its legal battle against the Pentagon, stating that the latter acted 'illegally' by punishing the AI company.

Also Read | Anthropic sees $30 trillion TAM, company tells investors: Report

What did the court rule?

The ruling came after the US government, earlier this year, labelled the company as a supply chain risk, AP reported. In a written order issued on Thursday night, District Judge Rita Lin said that the Pentagon's decision to punish the company was illegal after Anthropic criticised the Department of Defense's views on the use of AI. The US government is likely to contest the ruling.

Lin wrote that the Pentagon's actions "were based on a desire to make a public example out of Anthropic for its ‘arrogance’ in criticizing the government, not based on any articulable basis to believe that Anthropic would actually sabotage its model.”

Lin, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, said in a 59-page ruling that neither the US Constitution nor the federal statute the government invoked allows it to “impose sweeping penalties based principally on Anthropic’s critique of the Administration’s views.”

In a previous ruling, the district judge temporarily blocked the Pentagon from labelling the company as a supply chain risk and also blocked the enforcement of US President Donald Trump's social media directive ordering all federal agencies to stop using Anthropic and its chatbot Claude.

On 30 July, Lin noted that the US government's position was "really troubling" to her and that it seemed “at odds to me with the First Amendment.” She also said she believed the record had “gotten worse for the government” over time.

Also Read | Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei rejects claim AI regulation would concentrate power

Anthropic's response to the ruling

Welcoming the ruling, an Anthropic spokesperson said in a statement, "We remain focused on working productively with the government to harness AI for our national security so all Americans benefit from this technology.”

Anthropic vs Pentagon: Here's what we know

The dispute between Anthropic and the US government began in February when President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth accused the company of endangering national security and described it as a supply chain risk. However, the company's CEO, Dario Amodei, refused to back down over concerns that its products could be used for mass surveillance or autonomous armed drones.

Later in March, the AI company sued the Pentagon following its supply chain risk designation and termed it an "unlawful campaign of retaliation" over the government's refusal to allow unrestricted military use of its technology.

The legal challenge further intensified into a public dispute over how artificial intelligence can be used in warfare and mass surveillance. OpenAI, Anthropic's primary tech industry rival, made a deal with the Pentagon hours after the government punished Anthropic for its stance.

Also Read | Palantir locked in a battle with Pentagon DIA over key intelligence deal

The company has also filed a separate case against the Pentagon that is still pending in the federal appeals court in Washington. The case involves a different rule the Pentagon is using to try to declare the company a supply chain risk.

(with AP inputs)

About the Author

Swati Gandhi is a digital journalist with over four years of experience, specialising in international and geopolitical issues. Her work focuses on foreign policy, global power shifts, and the political and economic forces shaping international relations, with a particular emphasis on how global developments affect India. She approaches journalism with a strong belief in context-driven reporting, aiming to break down complex global events into clear, accessible narratives for a wide readership.<br><br> Previously, Swati has worked at Business Standard, where she covered a range of beats including national affairs, politics, and business. This diverse newsroom experience helped her build a strong grounding in reporting, while also strengthening her ability to work across both breaking news and in-depth explanatory stories. Covering multiple beats early in her career has helped her be informed about her current work, allowing her to connect domestic developments with wider international trends.<br><br> At Live Mint, she focuses on international and geopolitical issues through a business and economic lens, examining how global political developments, foreign policy decisions, and power shifts impact markets, industries, and India’s strategic and economic interests.<br><br> She holds a Bachelor’s degree in English (Honours) from the University of Delhi and a Master’s degree in Journalism and Mass Communication from Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University. Her academic training has shaped her emphasis on precision, analytical rigour, and clarity in writing. Her interests include global political economy and the intersection of geopolitics with business.<br><br> Outside work, Swati focuses on exploring her passion and love for food. From fancy cafes to street spots, Swati explores food like a true foodie.

Get Latest real-time updates

Stay updated with the latest Trending, India, World, CJP Protest in Delh LIVE and US news.

HomeNewsUs NewsAnthropic vs Pentagon: Judge rules in favour of AI company, says US govt acted ‘illegally’; all you need to know
More