AI Navigate

DOD says Anthropic’s ‘red lines’ make it an ‘unacceptable risk to national security’

TechCrunch / 3/18/2026

📰 NewsIndustry & Market Moves

Key Points

  • The U.S. Department of Defense labeled Anthropic an “unacceptable risk to national security,” marking the agency’s first public rebuttal to Anthropic’s lawsuits challenging the Pentagon’s decision to designate the company as a supply-chain risk.
  • The DoD’s 40-page filing argues Anthropic could try to disable or preemptively alter its AI technology during warfighting operations if the company believes its red lines are being crossed.
  • Anthropic had a $200 million Pentagon contract to deploy its technology within classified systems, with negotiations involving limits on mass surveillance and use in targeting or lethal weapon decisions, which the Pentagon contends private policy cannot dictate.
  • Legal observers noted the DoD’s claims rely on conjecture rather than concrete evidence, casting doubt on the basis for treating Anthropic as an adversary in the dispute.

The U.S. Department of Defense said on Tuesday evening that Anthropic poses an “unacceptable risk to national security,” marking the agency’s first rebuttal to the AI lab’s lawsuits challenging Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s decision last month to label the company a supply chain risk. As part of its complaints, Anthropic had requested the court temporarily block the DOD from enforcing its label.

The crux of the DOD’s argument, made in a 40-page filing in a California federal court, is the concern that Anthropic might “attempt to disable its technology or preemptively alter the behavior of its model” before or during “warfighting operations” if the company “feels that its corporate ‘red lines’ are being crossed.”

Anthropic last summer signed a $200 million contract with the Pentagon to deploy its technology within classified systems. In later negotiations over the terms of the contract, Anthropic said it did not want its AI systems to be used for mass surveillance of Americans, and that the technology wasn’t ready for use in targeting or firing decisions of lethal weapons. The Pentagon contested that a private company shouldn’t dictate how the military uses technology.

Chris Mattei, a lawyer specializing in First Amendment issues and a former Justice Department attorney, told TechCrunch there has been no investigation to support the DOD’s concerns of Anthropic potentially disabling or altering its AI models during warfighting operations. Without that evidence, the department’s argument fails to adequately explain how Anthropic’s negotiating position rendered it an “adversary,” Mattei argued.

“The government is relying completely on conjectural, speculative imaginings to justify a very, very serious legal step they’ve taken against Anthropic,” Mattei said. He added the department failed to “articulate a credible or even comprehensible rationale for why Anthropic’s refusal to agree to an ‘all lawful use’ provision rendered it a supply chain risk as opposed to a vendor that DOD simply didn’t want to do business with.”

Many organizations have spoken out against the DOD’s treatment of Anthropic, arguing that the department could have just ended its contract. Several tech companies and employees — including from OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft — as well as legal rights groups have filed amicus briefs in support of Anthropic. 

In its lawsuits, Anthropic accused the DOD of infringing on its First Amendment rights and punishing the company based on ideological grounds.  

Techcrunch event

Disrupt 2026: The tech ecosystem, all in one room

Your next round. Your next hire. Your next breakout opportunity. Find it at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026, where 10,000+ founders, investors, and tech leaders gather for three days of 250+ tactical sessions, powerful introductions, and market-defining innovation. Register now to save up to $400.

Save up to $300 or 30% to TechCrunch Founder Summit

1,000+ founders and investors come together at TechCrunch Founder Summit 2026 for a full day focused on growth, execution, and real-world scaling. Learn from founders and investors who have shaped the industry. Connect with peers navigating similar growth stages. Walk away with tactics you can apply immediately

Offer ends March 13.

San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026

“In many ways, the government’s nonsensical arguments are themselves the best evidence that the administration’s conduct was plainly a retaliatory punishment for Anthropic’s refusal to agree to the government’s terms, which, contrary to the government’s brief, is a form of protected expression,” Mattei told TechCrunch.

A hearing on Anthropic’s request for a preliminary injunction is set for next Tuesday.

Anthropic did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

This article has been updated to include information from Chris Mattei, a constitutional rights lawyer.