US Judge Suspends Government Sanctions on Anthropic, Court Order Says

A US federal judge has put the Trump administration’s sanctions on Anthropic on hold, ruling that the measures likely broke the law by effectively punishing the AI company for publicly questioning how its technology is being used by the Pentagon.

In the Northern District of California, Judge Rita Lin granted Anthropic’s request for a preliminary injunction, freezing a presidential order that barred all federal agencies from using Anthropic’s technology while the lawsuit proceeds.

The decision also halts the Pentagon’s designation of Anthropic as a national security supply chain risk—an official label typically reserved for organizations linked to unfriendly foreign countries.

Beyond blocking Pentagon use of Anthropic technology, the designation requires defense vendors and contractors to certify that they do not employ Anthropic’s models in work for the department.

“While this case was necessary to protect Anthropic, our customers, and our partners, our focus remains on working productively with the government to ensure all Americans benefit from safe, reliable AI.”

The legal fight flared up last month after Anthropic angered Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth by arguing that its technology should not be used for mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons systems.

Mr Hegseth responded on X, calling the company’s position a “master class in arrogance and betrayal as well as a textbook case of how not to do business with the United States Government or the Pentagon.”

Large parts of the technology industry moved quickly to back Anthropic following the administration’s punitive steps, which were suspended for seven days by yesterday’s ruling—giving the government time to file an emergency appeal on an expedited schedule.

At a hearing earlier this week, Judge Lin said she was concerned the government was “trying to punish Anthropic… for criticising the government’s contracting position in the press,” a move she suggested could violate the constitutional right to freedom of expression.

In her ruling, she said the government’s supply chain-risk designation appeared “likely both contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious.”

“Nothing in the governing statute supports the Orwellian notion that an American company may be branded a potential adversary and saboteur of the US for expressing disagreement with the government,” she wrote.

Judge Lin also pointed to other “serious procedural problems with the government’s actions” as additional grounds for the injunction.