Anthropic sues Pentagon over rare "supply chain risk" label; Axios, March 9, 2026

 Maria Curi, Axios; Anthropic sues Pentagon over rare "supply chain risk" label

"Anthropic on Monday sued the Pentagon, alleging its designation as a "supply chain risk" violates the company's First Amendment rights and exceeds the government's authority.

Why it matters: Supply chain risk designations are usually reserved for foreign adversaries that pose a national security risk — a punishment that could be hard for the government to square as it relied on Claude for operations in Iran.

State of play: The Pentagon last week designated Anthropic a supply chain risk, meaning companies must stop using Claude in cases directly tied to the department.

• President Trump also told the federal government in a Truth Social post to stop using Anthropic's technology, and some agencies have begun offboarding the tools.
• 
  

Anthropic is asking courts to undo the supply chain risk designation, block its enforcement and require federal agencies to withdraw directives to drop the company.

• The company says its two lawsuits are not meant to force the government to work with Anthropic, but prevent officials from blacklisting companies over policy disagreements."

The New Censorship: How did Google become the internet’s censor and master manipulator, blocking access to millions of websites?; U.S. News, 6/22/16

Robert Epstein, U.S. News; The New Censorship: How did Google become the internet’s censor and master manipulator, blocking access to millions of websites? :

"Google's mysterious and self-serving practice of blacklisting is one of many reasons Google should be regulated, just as phone companies and credit bureaus are. The E.U.'s recent antitrust actions against Google, the recently leaked FTC staff report about Google's biased search rankings, President Obama's call for regulating internet service providers – all have merit, but they overlook another danger. No one company, which is accountable to its shareholders but not to the general public, should have the power to instantly put another company out of business or block access to any website in the world. How frequently Google acts irresponsibly is beside the point; it has the ability to do so, which means that in a matter of seconds any of Google's 37,000 employees with the right passwords or skills could laser a business or political candidate into oblivion or even freeze much of the world's economy.

Some degree of censorship and blacklisting is probably necessary; I am not disputing that. But the suppression of information on the internet needs to be managed by, or at least subject to the regulations of, responsible public officials, with every aspect of their operations transparent to all."