Hegseth's redefinition of 'responsible AI' as 'objectively truthful AI employed within laws' operationally removes harm prevention from governance vocabulary

The Hegseth memorandum redefines 'responsible AI' as 'objectively truthful AI capabilities employed securely and within the laws governing the activities of the department.' This definition removes three categories of constraints present in the Biden-era definition: (1) safety constraints beyond legal minimums, (2) harm prevention requirements, and (3) limits on autonomous lethal decision-making. The new definition contains only three requirements: factual accuracy ('objectively truthful'), secure deployment, and legal compliance. This is an operative redefinition, not rhetorical—it enables any legally-compliant use of AI to qualify as 'responsible' regardless of harm. The redefinition works in tandem with the 'any lawful use' mandate: the mandate requires removal of vendor restrictions, while the redefinition ensures that removal qualifies as 'responsible' under DoD policy. This creates a definitional closure where governance elimination is reframed as governance compliance.