法官裁定特朗普政府非法惩罚 AI 公司 Anthropic

周四晚些时候，一名法官永久禁止特朗普政府执行一系列旨在切断 Anthropic 与联邦政府联系的规定，并裁定政府因受保护言论而惩罚这家人工智能公司，违反了宪法。

这项裁决标志着 Anthropic 在与政府长达数月的法律争斗中取得胜利。争议源于该公司试图为其强大的 AI 模型 Claude 设置护栏，该模型正被军方使用。Anthropic 希望阻止 Claude 被用于大规模监控或完全自主武器，但军方认为，应当允许其将该模型用于一切合法目的。

由于双方未能达成协议，特朗普总统今年早些时候下令联邦机构停止使用 Claude，国防部长 Pete Hegseth 则宣布该公司构成供应链风险，意图阻止私人国防承包商使用其产品为军方开展工作。政府辩称，这些举措对于保障国家安全是必要的。

旧金山美国联邦地区法院法官 Rita Lin 在周四的裁决中宣布，这些行动因惩罚 Anthropic 与政府意见不一致而违反第一修正案，并称其为“因 Anthropic 从事受宪法保护的表达活动而对其进行的非法报复”。她还表示，针对 Anthropic 的举措侵犯了该公司的正当程序权利。

Lin 表示，她的命令并不要求政府必须使用 Anthropic 的服务，也不要求政府停止将业务交给另一家 AI 公司，“只要这些行动符合适用的法规、法律和宪法条款”。

Lin 在一份长达 59 页的意见书中写道：“在国家安全这样的重大问题上，政府当然应获得尊重和酌处空间。但被告同期的言辞和行为证实，受到质疑的行动是出于这样的愿望：因为 Anthropic 批评政府时表现出的‘傲慢’，将其作为公开示众的对象；而不是基于任何可以明确说明的理由，相信 Anthropic 实际上会破坏其模型。”

Lin 继续写道：“空洞地援引国家安全，并不是惩罚和报复政府批评者的一张空白支票。”

Anthropic 一名发言人向 CBS News 表示：“我们欢迎法院裁定这一供应链风险认定违法。我们仍专注于与政府开展富有成效的合作，利用 AI 服务国家安全，让所有美国人都能从这项技术中受益。”

CBS News 已联系五角大楼和白宫寻求置评。

Lin 在裁决中写道，Anthropic 不符合“供应链风险”的法律定义；这一认定通常用于防止外国对手破坏美国关键系统。

政府此前曾辩称，Anthropic 强硬的谈判立场以及对 AI 限制措施的推动，使联邦官员担心该公司可能通过在软件中安装“终止开关”，实施“未来破坏”。

但 Lin 称这一担忧“完全没有依据”，并指出 Anthropic 提供的证据显示，该公司没有能力维持对其系统的“后门”访问。她还表示，政府仍有兴趣与 Anthropic 就先进 AI 模型展开合作，这一点很难与其对破坏行为的担忧相协调。

Lin 在周四的裁决中表示：“一家 IT 供应商不会仅仅因为提出尖锐问题，或固执地坚持特定合同条款，就成为美国的潜在对手——即便这样做导致战争部（DoW）怀疑其可信度。”

Lin 还宣布 Hegseth 于 2 月发布的一则社交媒体帖文无效。该帖文称，任何军方承包商均不得与 Anthropic 开展“任何商业活动”。Lin 表示，这导致了对这家 AI 公司的更广泛“抵制”，甚至波及那些为非军事相关工作使用 Anthropic 服务的军方承包商。政府律师曾承认，将 Anthropic 列为供应链风险，并不妨碍企业将该 AI 技术用于其他用途。

Lin 还撤销了多个其他联邦机构切断与 Anthropic 关系的行动。这些行动是在特朗普于 Truth Social 发帖命令政府“立即停止一切对 Anthropic 技术的使用”后实施的。她表示，这些举措没有法律授权，总统指令是一项“未经正当程序的报复性行为，意在因 Anthropic 的受保护言论而惩罚该公司”。

法官写道：“在正式、行政性的程序——即作出将 Anthropic 指定为供应链风险所必需认定的程序——尚未启动之前，就通过社交媒体公开传播对 Anthropic 的惩罚决定，除非是试图迅速将 Anthropic 作为公开示众对象、惩罚其胆敢批评政府，否则几乎无法作出合理解释。”

Anthropic 与军方之间的争议，凸显了一个更广泛的辩论：政府与私营企业应如何平衡人工智能的潜在收益与风险。

Anthropic 及其 CEO Dario Amodei 长期以来一直公开支持通过监管和护栏来应对不受约束的 AI 技术所带来的风险。特朗普政府呼吁对强大 AI 模型实施某种程度的自愿性联邦监管，但认为过于严格的监管可能扼杀创新，并削弱美国相对中国的竞争力；政府还指责一些 AI 模型存在政治偏见，或过于“觉醒”（woke）。

今年早些时候，随着双方围绕 AI 限制发生冲突，分歧公开化。Amodei 2 月曾对 CBS News 表示，他抱有与军方合作的“爱国”愿望，但存在两条绝对“红线”：使用 Claude 对美国人实施大规模监控，以及使用它为无需人类介入即可锁定目标的自主武器提供支持。他认为，Claude 的准确性不足以用于自主武器，而大规模监控可能与美国价值观相冲突。

军方则认为，联邦法律和内部政策已经禁止国内大规模监控或完全自主武器，因此没有必要在五角大楼的合同中限制这些做法。

双方于 2 月的谈判破裂后，特朗普政府猛烈抨击 Anthropic，指控其试图将自身意识形态强加给军方。Hegseth 称 Anthropic “自命清高”，特朗普则称其为“一家激进左翼、觉醒派公司”。

特朗普政府对 Anthropic 采取行动后，该公司在旧金山联邦法院起诉政府，指控政府因其受保护言论而惩罚该公司，从而违反第一修正案。该公司还在美国哥伦比亚特区巡回上诉法院挑战政府行动，该案件仍在审理中。

Anthropic 获得了公民自由团体以及其他科技行业参与者的支持，其中包括 Microsoft。Microsoft 在一份法庭之友意见书中写道，将 Anthropic 指定为供应链风险“可能带来不符合公共利益的严重经济影响”。

政府则予以反驳，称其切断 Anthropic 的服务并非因为该公司批评特朗普政府，而是因为国防部——政府正试图将其更名为战争部——不再信任该公司。政府还称，特朗普有权决定不购买 Anthropic 的服务，并将联邦机构停止使用 Claude 的决定称作“内部 IT 日常管理”。

司法部律师在 6 月写道：“政府并未因任何受保护言论而报复 Anthropic。相反，战争部评估认为，Anthropic 可能操纵其 AI 模型，以对战争部使用该模型的方式实施主观红线；这可能对国家安全造成严重损害。”

Lin 早期便对特朗普政府的立场持怀疑态度。今年 3 月，在称这些举措“令人担忧”且“奥威尔式”之后，她发布了一项初步禁令，阻止政府切断与 Anthropic 的关系。

A judge late Thursday permanently barred the Trump administration from enforcing a set of rules aimed at cutting off Anthropic from the federal government, ruling the administration had unconstitutionally punished the artificial intelligence company for protected speech.

The ruling marks a victory for Anthropic in its monthslong legal battle against the administration over its push to impose guardrails on its powerful AI model Claude, which is used by the military. Anthropic sought to prevent Claude from being used for mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons, but the military argued it should be allowed to use the model for all lawful purposes.

With the two sides unable to reach a deal, President Trump ordered federal agencies to stop using Claude earlier this year, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declared the firm a supply chain risk, aiming to prevent private defense contractors from using it to do work for the military. The administration argued those moves were necessary to safeguard national security.

In her ruling Thursday, U.S. District Judge Rita Lin of San Francisco declared that those actions violated the First Amendment by punishing it for disagreeing with the government, calling them "unlawful retaliation against Anthropic for constitutionally protected expressive activities." She also said the moves against Anthropic violated the company's due process rights.

Lin said her order does not require the government to use Anthropic or stop it from giving another AI firm its business, "so long as those actions are consistent with applicable regulations, statutes, and constitutional provisions."

"The government is certainly owed deference on weighty issues of national security," Lin wrote in a 59-page opinion. "But Defendants' contemporaneous words and deeds confirm that the challenged actions were based on a desire to make a public example out of Anthropic for its 'arrogance' in criticizing the government, not based on any articulable basis to believe that Anthropic would actually sabotage its model."

Lin continued: "The empty invocation of national security is not a blank check to punish and retaliate against government critics."

An Anthropic spokesperson told CBS News: "We welcome the court's ruling that this supply chain risk designation was unlawful. We remain focused on working productively with the government to harness AI for our national security so all Americans benefit from this technology."

CBS News has reached out to the Pentagon and the White House for comment.

In her ruling, Lin wrote that Anthropic does not meet the legal definition of a "supply chain risk," a designation typically used to prevent a foreign adversary from sabotaging a crucial U.S. system.

The government has argued in the past that Anthropic's tough negotiating stance and push for AI restrictions caused federal officials to fear the company could engage in "future sabotage" by installing a "kill switch" in its software.

But Lin called this concern "entirely unfounded," pointing to evidence offered by Anthropic that it doesn't have the ability to maintain "backdoor" access to its systems. She also argued the fears of sabotage are tough to square with the government's continued interest in collaborating with Anthropic on advanced AI models.

"An IT vendor does not become a potential adversary of the United States whenever it asks probing questions or stubbornly insists on particular contracting terms, even if doing so causes DoW to doubt its trustworthiness," Lin said in her ruling Thursday.

Lin also invalidated a February social media post by Hegseth stating that no military contractors are allowed to conduct "any commercial activity with Anthropic," saying it led to a broader "boycott" of the AI firm — even among military contractors that were using Anthropic for non-military-related work. Lawyers for the government had conceded that designating Anthropic as a supply chain risk didn't prevent companies from using the AI technology for other purposes.

And Lin reversed several other federal agencies' efforts to cut off Anthropic, which followed a Truth Social post by Mr. Trump ordering the government to "IMMEDIATELY CEASE all use of Anthropic's technology." She said those moves weren't authorized by law, and the president's directive was a "retaliatory act, taken without due process, meant to punish Anthropic for its protected speech."

The judge wrote that "the decision to publicly broadcast Anthropic's punishment via social media—even before the formal, administrative process of making the necessary findings to designate Anthropic a supply chain risk had begun— makes little sense except as an attempt to swiftly make a public example of Anthropic for daring to criticize the Administration."

The dispute between Anthropic and the military highlights a broader debate over how governments and private companies should balance the potential benefits and perils of artificial intelligence.

Anthropic and its CEO, Dario Amodei, have long been vocal in their support for regulations and guardrails to manage the dangers of unconstrained AI technology. The Trump administration has called for some voluntary federal oversight of powerful AI models, but argues that overly stringent regulations could stifle innovation and make the U.S. less competitive against China, and has accused some AI models of being politically biased or "woke."

The disagreement burst into public view earlier this year, as the two sides feuded over AI restrictions. Amodei told CBS News in February he has a "patriotic" desire to work with the military, but he has two absolute "red lines": using Claude to conduct mass surveillance of Americans, and using it to power autonomous weapons that can target people without human input. He argued Claude isn't accurate enough for autonomous weapons, and mass surveillance could clash with American values.

The military argued that federal laws and internal policies already prevent domestic mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons, so there is no need to restrict those practices in the Pentagon's contracts.

After negotiations between the two sides broke down in February, the Trump administration lashed out at Anthropic, accusing it of seeking to impose its own ideology on the military. Hegseth called Anthropic "sanctimonious," and Mr. Trump called it a "radical left, woke company."

After the Trump administration took action against Anthropic, the company sued in San Francisco federal court, accusing the government of violating the First Amendment by punishing it for protected speech. It also challenged the government's actions in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, a case that is still pending.

Anthropic drew support from civil liberties groups and from other tech industry players, including Microsoft, which wrote in an amicus brief that designating Anthropic a supply chain risk "may bring severe economic effects that are not in the public interest."

The government pushed back, arguing it cut off Anthropic not because it criticized the Trump administration, but because the Defense Department — which the administration has sought to rename the Department of War — no longer trusted the company. It also argued Mr. Trump has the power to decide not to buy Anthropic's services, and called the decisions by federal agencies to stop using Claude "internal IT housekeeping."

"The government did not retaliate against Anthropic for any protected speech," Justice Department lawyers wrote in June. "Instead, DoW assessed a substantial risk that Anthropic might manipulate its AI model to enforce subjective redlines on DoW's use of the model, in ways that could cause serious harm to national security."

Lin was skeptical of the Trump administration's position early on. She issued a preliminary injunction blocking the government from cutting off Anthropic in March, after calling the moves "troubling" and "Orwellian."