AFPI files amicus brief supporting government authority in Anthropic case

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The America First Policy Institute (AFPI) today filed an amicus brief in Anthropic PBC v. U.S. Department of War, backing the federal government’s authority to protect national security when a critical technology vendor attempts to limit lawful military use of its products. AFPI’s brief argues that private companies — especially companies developing frontier AI capabilities with major national-security implications — should not be able to dictate the terms of war to the United States government.

The case follows the Department of War’s March 3 determination that procuring AI goods or services from Anthropic presents a supply-chain risk to national security. Anthropic has publicly said its dispute with the government centers on two categories of use: mass domestic surveillance and fully autonomous weapons. In denying Anthropic’s motion for a stay on April 8, the D.C. Circuit said the dispute implicates “vital AI technology during an active military conflict” and held that the balance of equities favored the government.

“Anthropic wants to be treated like the future of American power right up until American power asks something of it,” said Leigh Ann O’Neill, chief legal affairs officer at the America First Policy Institute. “If a company chooses to build world-changing technology, sell into America’s defense ecosystem, and market itself as indispensable to the future, it cannot then claim the right to decide when the country may or may not use that technology in its own defense.”

AFPI’s brief warns the stakes extend far beyond a single vendor dispute. As AI firms race to position themselves as foundational to America’s economy, infrastructure, and military advantage, this case tests whether private actors can reap the benefits of that status while disclaiming the responsibilities that come with it. AFPI argues that warfighting decisions must remain with constitutionally accountable officials — not with CEOs or tangled up in private, contractual leverage.

“This is bigger than one contract, one company, or one lawsuit,” O’Neill added. “It is about whether the United States government remains in charge when American lives are on the line. In matters of national defense, operational control can’t rest with a private permission structure.”

Public reporting has shown that Anthropic’s technology was used in sensitive military contexts and that the company later objected to certain categories of use. Anthropic has also said it wants to support U.S. national security, while insisting on retaining those restrictions. AFPI’s position: Once a company enters this space and becomes materially intertwined with national-security operations, the government is entitled to treat uncertainty, conditionality, and private veto claims as serious supply-chain concerns.

AFPI's amicus brief was filed in support of the government in the D.C. Circuit proceeding.