Share and Follow
Shlomo Kramer, co-founder and CEO of the cybersecurity company Cato Networks, has ignited a heated debate after suggesting that the United States should consider imposing restrictions on the First Amendment. Kramer believes that democratic nations need to take proactive measures to regulate online speech in response to emerging threats, before it becomes too late.
In an interview with CNBC, Kramer, known for his role in founding tech giants Check Point Software and Imperva, expressed concerns over the advantage authoritarian regimes gain through the use of artificial intelligence, while democracies remain committed to protecting free speech.
“Though it may be difficult to accept, it’s essential to consider limiting the First Amendment to ultimately preserve it,” Kramer stated during the interview.
He emphasized that unchecked speech on social media is exacerbating societal polarization and providing opportunities for adversarial forces to disrupt societal and political structures.
Kramer suggests that both governments and technology companies should assume a more active role in overseeing online platforms, deciding who has the right to speak and the extent of their influence.
“We need to control the platforms, all the social platforms,” Kramer said.
He proposed a system that would “stack, rank, the authenticity of every person that expresses themselves online,” with speech privileges determined by that ranking.
Based on that system, Kramer said authorities should “take control over what they are saying.”
Kramer framed the proposal as an emergency response to rapidly advancing AI tools that can generate fake content faster than governments can regulate them.
“The technology is moving much faster than the political system typically can respond,” he said, arguing that technological controls are needed to “stabilize the political system.”
Kramer contrasted the US with China, which he said maintains “a single narrative that protects its inner stability,” while democratic countries allow multiple narratives that can be exploited by adversaries.
Kramer’s remarks ignited an immediate backlash on X, where users accused him of promoting censorship and meddling in US constitutional rights.
One widely shared post from the account Wall Street Mav said, “Foreigners have zero business telling us anything,” alongside a clip of Kramer’s interview.
Another post labeled Kramer an “Israeli billionaire” pushing for Americans to surrender their First Amendment rights, while critics framed his proposals as indistinguishable from China’s system of state-controlled speech.
The account “The General” wrote that Kramer’s comments amounted to a call to “eliminate America’s First Amendment,” branding him a “tyrant” and invoking a quote attributed to Thomas Jefferson warning that attacks on a free press signal authoritarian rule.
Others rejected the framing outright. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) responded simply, “No,” while reposting a claim that Kramer was calling for speech limits to combat antisemitism.
Several users pointed to Kramer’s comparison of the US to China, accusing him of endorsing a single-state narrative enforced by government power.
Kramer did not respond publicly to the social media criticism.
Kramer did not call for abolishing the Constitution outright but repeatedly argued that constitutional protections must be restricted in order to survive in the age of AI warfare.
He said governments must also build cyber defense programs “as sophisticated as the sub-attack,” noting that the current imbalance between attackers and defenders is “1 to 100.”
Until governments act, Kramer said, private companies are being forced to fend for themselves by buying increasingly expensive cybersecurity tools.
Enterprises “can’t afford all these solutions by themselves,” he said, pushing instead for platform-based security models offered by firms like Cato Networks, CrowdStrike and Wiz.
The Post has sought comment from Kramer.
