Judge Rules Pentagon Violated Constitutional Rights in Anthropic Case

The takes

• 

  Adam Smith

  1723–1790, Scotland (the Scottish Enlightenment: Kirkcaldy, Glasgow, Edinburgh)

  When Security Becomes a Pretext, Justice Becomes a Casualty

  In branding Anthropic a “supply chain risk” to silence criticism, the state betrayed both the impartial spectator and its own proper office, chilling innovation under the cloak of defence.

  The facts, so far as they are reported, are plain and therefore all the more disturbing. A firm engaged in the higher computations now fashionable, Anthropic, possessed high security clearances, enjoyed consistent praise from the very department that employed its models, and attracted no recorded doubts as to its trustworthiness. Then came a public quarrel between the company and the defence establishment about the use of those models. Suddenly, without any new evidence of danger, the company was branded a supply chain risk, its contract terminated, and that stigma extended across other arms of government. A federal judge has now pronounced these measures not only baseless, but illegal. When power moves this quickly from favour to proscription, the impartial spectator begins to reach for his wallet.

  Read the essay →
• 

  John Locke

  1632–1704, England (writing amid the Exclusion Crisis and the Glorious Revolution)

  When Government Punishes Speech and Calls It “Risk Management”

  By branding a trusted contractor a “supply chain risk” to silence criticism, the government stepped outside lawful authority into plain usurpation.

  The matter, as I understand it, is simple in its core though wrapped in modern dress. A technology company, having enjoyed high security clearance and official praise, entered into public dispute with the Department of Defense about the government’s use of its models. Thereafter, the company was suddenly designated a “supply chain risk,” contracts were curtailed, and penalties followed. A federal judge has now declared these measures “illegal and baseless,” finding violations of the First Amendment and of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth, because liberty interests were taken without prior notice or a fair hearing. Behind the unfamiliar machinery of agencies and algorithms, I see an old question: what is political power, and on what terms is it held in trust?

  Read the essay →
• 

  Niccolò Machiavelli

  1469–1527, Florence (republican secretary and diplomat, then exile, amid the Italian Wars)

  The Pentagon Tried to Rule by Fear and Ended in Ridicule

  By turning a political quarrel into a baseless “supply chain risk,” the state chose the worst kind of severity: one that fails, is exposed, and teaches others that its threats are empty.

  The story is simple enough. An administration quarrels in public with a powerful firm over how its models are used. Words fly between the defense secretary and the company’s chief. Then the quarrel leaves the newspapers and enters the chancery: the Pentagon suddenly discovers the firm is a “supply chain risk,” contracts are cut off, designations spread to other agencies. The judge who inspects the record finds no prior hint of risk, only praise and high security clearances. She calls the measures “illegal and baseless,” finds violations of free expression and due process, and vacates the orders. In one stroke, an act meant to intimidate a critic instead proclaims the government’s impotence.

  Read the essay →