Il nuovo candidato del Dipartimento di Giustizia di Trump vuole vietare il porno online e perseguire le grandi aziende tecnologiche

President Donald Trump has nominated Adam Candeub to serve as head of antitrust enforcement at the Department of Justice (DOJ). The nomination comes amid growing concerns over the role of technology companies in shaping public discourse and the regulation of online content. Candeub, currently general counsel for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), has expressed views that align with conservative policies on free speech and morality, suggesting a potential shift in the DOJ’s approach toward regulating digital spaces. According to reports, Candeub authored a detailed analysis advocating for the criminalization of pornography to safeguard marriage and encourage personal development. He references historical practices where societies sought to limit access to sexually explicit materials, arguing that such measures helped channel sexual desires into marital relationships. This perspective contrasts sharply with contemporary interpretations of free expression, particularly those upheld by recent judicial decisions. Candeub has also shown interest in broadening antitrust enforcement, especially concerning major technology firms. His involvement with the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 indicates a willingness to consider the psychological impact of social media on users when assessing whether these platforms violate antitrust laws. This stance suggests a departure from traditional economic analyses, incorporating sociological factors into legal considerations. In his work titled “Restoring Obscenity Regulation in an Internet Age,” Candeub commends the Supreme Court’s 2025 ruling in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, which permitted states to impose mandatory ID checks on websites hosting content deemed harmful to minors. He argues that this decision paves the way for revisiting outdated obscenity regulations and potentially reinstating stricter controls akin to those enforced in earlier decades. Historically, certain jurisdictions implemented strict rules against sexually explicit material, often guided by the Hicklin standard. Under this framework, courts determined whether content could be classified as obscene based on its capacity to corrupt individuals susceptible to immoral influence. Notable cases included legal challenges against works such as An American Tragedy and Ulysses, reflecting the era’s stringent standards. While Candeub does not advocate for prosecuting authors or publishers directly, he proposes enhanced monitoring mechanisms to prevent minors from accessing adult content online. These include leveraging publicly accessible data, such as email addresses or visual cues from hand movements, to estimate age. Additionally, he supports utilizing existing state and federal statutes to pursue charges against pornography sites and other platforms facilitating access to such content. The modern iteration of the Comstock Act, originally enacted in the late 19th century, prohibits the interstate distribution of obscene material. Candeub suggests that motivated prosecutors in conservative regions could leverage this law to secure convictions, while national authorities might target large platforms like Google, which lack immunity from federal regulations. These proposals highlight a potential transformation in the DOJ’s strategy regarding digital content regulation and corporate accountability. As the confirmation process unfolds, observers will be watching closely to see how these ideas translate into policy and legal action. The implications extend beyond mere legal adjustments, influencing broader societal norms and the balance between individual freedoms and collective welfare.