New court filings reveal that the Pentagon indicated it was close to an agreement with AI company Anthropic on security protocols, just a week after former President Trump publicly stated that ties were severed. This information emerged in sworn declarations submitted by Anthropic to a California federal court, challenging the Defense Department’s claims that the AI firm poses a significant national security risk. The declarations aim to counter assertions made in the government’s case, which Anthropic argues are based on misunderstandings of their negotiations and technical capabilities.

Anthropic’s filings, presented ahead of a crucial court hearing, assert that the government’s legal arguments misrepresent the substance of months-long discussions. Specifically, Anthropic denies ever demanding a role in approving military operations, a central claim the Defense Department has used to justify its stance. The company states that this particular concern was never voiced by Pentagon officials during their extensive talks.

The dispute intensified in late February when then-President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced a halt to collaboration with Anthropic. This decision followed the AI company’s refusal to grant unrestricted military use of its advanced AI technology. The public declaration of severed ties created a stark contrast to the private communications that, according to Anthropic, showed progress toward mutual understanding.

Declarations from Anthropic’s Head of Policy, Sarah Heck, and Head of Public Sector, Thiyagu Ramasamy, directly address the government’s position. Heck, a former National Security Council official, was present at key meetings and insists that the notion of Anthropic seeking oversight over military actions is a fabrication. She also highlighted that concerns about the potential for Anthropic’s technology to be disabled mid-operation were never brought up during negotiations.

These court submissions underscore a significant disagreement over the nature of the AI company’s engagement with the military and the validity of national security concerns. The legal battle is set to continue with an upcoming hearing, where the court will consider these new declarations against the backdrop of the Pentagon’s stated security anxieties and Anthropic’s defense of its negotiation process.