Judge Says Trump Administration Still Lacks Evidence for Anthropic ‘Supply-Chain Risk’ Label

A federal judge said Thursday that the Trump administration has not provided enough evidence to justify labeling Anthropic a supply-chain risk or banning federal agencies from using its AI technology.

Bloomberg and Axios first reported the hearing.

The case stems from failed contract talks between Anthropic and the U.S. Department of Defence. Anthropic said it opposed its AI being used for mass surveillance or for targeting and firing decisions involving weapons, arguing the technology is not ready for those uses. Pentagon responded that private companies should not control military use of technology and said it would only deploy AI in lawful ways.

Judge questions government’s justification

The government also argued that Anthropic’s public criticism of the Defence Department supported its decision to label the company a supply-chain risk and block federal use of its tools. U.S. District Judge Rita Lin expressed scepticism about that reasoning during Thursday’s hearing.

She called the argument “really troubling,” warning it could set a precedent where contractors are punished for disagreeing with government policy.

Another government claim focused on concerns that Anthropic could disable or alter its AI models during military operations.

The Defence Department suggested the company might be able to interfere with models after deployment in wartime.

Judge Lin questioned that claim, saying she had seen no evidence that Anthropic could modify a delivered model or activate a “kill switch.” Experts have also said there is no evidence supporting that allegation.

Anthropic continues legal challenge

The hearing is part of one of two lawsuits Anthropic filed against the Defence Department in March. The company is challenging both the supply-chain risk designation and the federal ban on its technology. A separate related case is also ongoing in Washington.

Judge Lin previously issued a temporary order blocking enforcement of the ban in March. She is now considering whether to make that injunction permanent while the broader case proceeds.