Shlomo Kramer, the co-founder and CEO of cybersecurity firm Cato Networks, sparked outrage online after he urged Americans to “limit the First Amendment” — arguing that democratic nations must respond to emerging dangers by controlling online speech before it’s “too late.”
Kramer, a serial entrepreneur who helped found Check Point Software and Imperva, told CNBC that artificial intelligence has given authoritarian governments an “unfair advantage” over democracies that protect free expression.
“I know it’s difficult to hear, but it’s time to limit the First Amendment in order to protect it,” Kramer said during the interview.
He argued that unrestricted speech on social media platforms is fueling polarization and allowing hostile actors to undermine “the fabric of society and politics.”
According to Kramer, governments and technology companies should take direct control of online platforms and determine who is allowed to speak — and how much influence their speech should carry.
“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.
Kramer told The Post that his remarks were taken out of context and that he is a supporter of the First Amendment.
He said his intent was to combat disinformation and online “operations [that] leverage anonymity and non-human actors to drown out authentic voices and tear at the social fabric of Western democracies.”
“The goal is not to limit the speech of individuals, but to ensure that the public square remains a place for transparent, human debate, protected from the corrosive impact of covert digital manipulation,” Kramer told The Post.
