Discussion

• @allinallnotbad Samuel Roland on x

  Katsas getting down to brass tacks, what are the differences between the SCR designation and these less intrusive measure. Anthropic lawyer's response: 1. Permanent legal disbarment, blocks future modification 2. 4713 was meant to be a whole of government effort, creates risk of

• @allinallnotbad Samuel Roland on x

  Two orders that count as covered procurement orders, the March 3 and the March 6; both are evidence of covered procurement actions. Have to be honest here, can't tell whether Anthropic lawyer is claiming that the notices themselves or the downstream actions are the covered

• @hadas_gold Hadas Gold on x

  Anthropic and Pentagon are at the DC circuit court of appeals re: Supply Chain Risk designation. One of the judges, Henderson, seems incensed. “To me this is just a spectacular overreach by the department.” she also said “I see no evidence of that. I don't see that the department

• @allinallnotbad Samuel Roland on x

  Reminder before we start for those listening in that the panel draw was quite rough for Anthropic, so you should expect an uphill battle going in here.

• @allinallnotbad Samuel Roland on x

  Here we go. Immediately hot bench, already on to jurisdiction under 1327, question is “what is the covered procurement action here?” from Judge Rao. Anthropic responds that the written designation and notice from the DoW is authorizes all procurement actions, converts to

• @allinallnotbad Samuel Roland on x

  “To me this is just a spectacular overreach by the department” - Judge Henderson

• @allinallnotbad Samuel Roland on x

  Judge Henderson with an incredibly pro-Anthropic questions “I see no evidence of sabotage, malicious, etc. I don't see any evidence that the DoW has supported its designation that Anthropic is a bad actor?” (paraphrased here). WOW, did not expect that.