In the 48-page complaint, filed in federal court in San Francisco, Anthropic seeks to have its designation as a national security supply-chain risk declared unlawful and blocked.
In its lawsuit, Anthropic said the company was founded on the belief that its AI is “used in a way that maximises positive outcomes for humanity” and should “be the safest and the most responsible.”
“Anthropic brings this suit because the federal government has retaliated against it for expressing that principle,” the lawsuit says.
Anthropic is the first US company ever to have been publicly punished with such a designation, a label typically reserved for organisations from foreign adversary countries.
The designation requires defence vendors and contractors to certify that they do not use Anthropic’s models in their work with the Pentagon.
“The consequences of this case are enormous,” the lawsuit states, with the government “seeking to destroy the economic value created by one of the world’s fastest-growing private companies.”
The dispute erupted after Anthropic infuriated Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth by insisting its technology should not be used for mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons systems.
US President Donald Trump ordered every federal agency to cease all use of Anthropic’s technology. Hours later, Hegseth designated Anthropic a “Supply-Chain Risk to National Security” and ordered that no military contractor, supplier or partner “may conduct any commercial activity with Anthropic,” while allowing a six-month transition period for the Pentagon itself.
The row erupted days before the US military attack against Iran. Claude is the Pentagon’s most widely deployed frontier AI model and the only such model currently operating on the Department of War’s classified systems.
In its lawsuit, Anthropic argues the actions taken against it violate the First Amendment by punishing the company for protected speech on AI safety policy, exceed the Pentagon’s statutory authority, and deprive it of due process under the Fifth Amendment.
“The Constitution does not allow the government to wield its enormous power to punish a company for its protected speech,” the complaint states.
The company is seeking a permanent injunction blocking enforcement of the designation. (AFP)
Edited by Cecil Wong
