Anthropic's "Supply Chain Risk" Designation Stemmed from Its Refusing to Agree to Contract Terms, Not Its Speech
Source ↗
👁 0
💬 0
From Judge Gregory Katsas, joined by Judge Neomi Rao, in today's D.C. Circuit decision in Anthropic PBC v. U.S. Department of War:
To succeed on such a First Amendment retaliation claim, the plaintiff or petitioner must prove that (1) it engaged in protected speech, (2) the government took materially adverse action against it, and (3) the speech caused the materially adverse action
Anthropic has satisfied the first and second prongs of this test, but not the third. The First Amendment squarely p
To succeed on such a First Amendment retaliation claim, the plaintiff or petitioner must prove that (1) it engaged in protected speech, (2) the government took materially adverse action against it, and (3) the speech caused the materially adverse action
Anthropic has satisfied the first and second prongs of this test, but not the third. The First Amendment squarely p
Comments (0)