In the Northern District of California, Judge Rita Lin granted a preliminary injunction against Anthropic’s lawsuit against the government, freezing an executive order banning the use of Anthropic’s technology by all federal agencies.
The ruling also halts the Department of Defense’s national security supply chain risk designation for Anthropic, the creator of the Claude AI model, which is typically given to unfriendly foreign entities.
The designation not only prevents the Pentagon from using the company’s technology, but also requires all defense vendors and contractors to certify that they are not using Anthropic models in their work with the department.
“We appreciate the court’s swift action and are pleased that the court agreed that Anthropic is likely to succeed on the merits,” a company spokesperson said.
“While this lawsuit was necessary to protect Anthropic, our customers, and partners, we remain focused on working productively with the government to ensure all Americans receive the benefits of safe and reliable AI.”
The controversy erupted last month after Anthropic Inc. infuriated Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth by arguing that its technology should not be used for mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons systems.
Hegseth said in X that Anthropic “not only provided a master class in arrogance and betrayal, but also a textbook example of how not to do business with the U.S. government and the Department of Defense.”
The tech industry has largely supported Anthropic after Thursday’s ruling suspended punitive action for seven days to give the government time to file an emergency appeal in the short term.
At a hearing earlier this week, Lin said he was concerned that the government was “seeking to punish Mr. Anthropic for criticizing the government’s curtailment of its position in the press,” which he feared would be a violation of his constitutional right to freedom of expression.
In her ruling, she said the government’s designation of human-induced risks as supply chain risks was “in violation of the law and likely to be arbitrary and capricious.”
“There is nothing in applicable law to support the Orwellian notion that expressing disagreement with the government could brand a U.S. company as a potential adversary or saboteur of the United States,” she wrote.
Lin also cited other “significant procedural issues regarding the government’s actions” as reasons for issuing the injunction.
© 2026 AFP
