I’ve been studying Big Tech for a long time. What just happened with Anthropic and the Pentagon terrifies me

I spent two years at the Federal Trade Commission, watching regulators doing their best to keep pace with Silicon Valley. I thought I had seen the outer limits of how distorted Big Tech’s command over government policy could be; I did not think it could get worse. I was wrong. Last month, Anthropic refused to allow the Defense Department to use Claude, the company’s popular flagship family of AI assistants, for domestic mass surveillance and lethal autonomous warfare. In response, the government canceled its $200 million contract with Anthropic. According to the Department, the company’s constraints would undercut its ability to defend the country from real threats. The Pentagon designated the company a “supply-chain risk” because, according to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, the company’s “woke” approach threatens national security. This move will not significantly impact Anthropic because most of the company’s business comes from nongovernmental partners and clients. But it matters; the company stands to lose hundreds of millions of dollars. Anthropic has accordingly sued. As it should. It alleges that, among other things, the Department’s designation is based on the company’s protected views about AI safety. This, it argues, violates the First Amendment. A court has so far upheld the designation while briefing continues. For year, tech companies have invoked the First Amendment and other laws to shield themselves from legal accountability. In this case, Anthropic does the opposite: it argues that the First Amendment allows it to make decisions that safeguard the public, against the government’s wishes. None of this is normal — and I say that as someone whose job at the FTC and as a law professor is to define what normal government oversight of these companies looks like. In ordinary times, we would expect government procurement officials to insist that private contractors implement technical saf