Backlash Revealed in President Biden’s Autopen Case

A DOJ official announced that President Donald Trump wants an investigation into the presidential pardons that President Joe Biden issued for five family members (including Hunter Biden) and inmates on death row. Could the use of an autopen invalidate the pardons? And was Biden aware of it being used?

I personally operated an autopen – in the 1990s – and back then, it felt like operating an organ at church. Of course, many businesses nowadays use autopens – I’m sure they’ve gotten a lot more sophisticated since then. People also use DocuSign to buy houses.

So you have numerous ways to sign important documents. However, the questions remain: When it comes to a presidential pardon, does the use of an autopen matter? And what was President Biden’s level of awareness of the autopen being used?

In 2005, the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice put out a memo clarifying the parameters for a U.S. President to use a signature versus an autopen to sign bills. The author of the memo is a current federal judge whom President Trump appointed.

The Constitution requires that a President use a signature when signing legislation. It doesn’t specify a requirement for a wet signature. Thus, the Office of Legal Counsel’s memo determined that even an autopen is fair game for signing legislation. Because if a U.S. President has made a decision and instructed someone to sign it with an autopen, that is as good as the President signing it personally.

Such a discussion naturally brings up the issue of Executive orders, which fall under the Take Care Clause of Article II, Section 3: “[The U.S. President] shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” An Executive order is an avenue by which the U.S. President fulfills that clause. Further, an Executive order can be overturned by a succeeding Commander-in-Chief with the stroke of a pen – Congress doesn’t have to vote on it.

Regarding pardons, the Constitution states: “[The U.S. President] shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”Again, there is no mention of a signature, so an autopen is more than sufficient for a presidential pardon.

The nation will go down a slippery slope if we start to argue that a presidential pardon should be overturned based on the cognitive understanding of a previous President. I’m not sure if that could even be proven in a court of law.

Also, don’t doubt that the far Left wouldn't use the same tactic to overturn presidential pardons by President Trump by declaring that he was mentally unfit when he issued pardons, such as for the Jan. 6 protesters. The media has been arguing for years that he’s unhinged.

At the end of the day, the Constitution provides a remedy for removing a sitting U.S. President who is unable to fulfill the duties of office: the 25th Amendment. Of course, it was never invoked during Biden’s presidency.

Honestly, the debate over the autopen is a waste of time that shouldn’t be a focus of the DOJ. The Trump Administration has way more important issues to resolve in America right now, such as rampant antisemitism resulting in Jews being gunned down or attacked with flamethrowers in the streets of America.

The ACLJ has been fighting in court to preserve Executive authority. Rogue district judges shouldn’t be allowed to issue nationwide injunctions that affect the entire country and undermine the U.S. President’s agenda.

We filed an amicus brief at the U.S. Supreme Court to put a stop to the rogue judges. The Justices heard oral arguments recently. We expect to hear a decision soon.

Today’s Sekulow broadcast included a full analysis of President Trump’s wanting to investigate President Biden’s use of an autopen to sign presidential pardons.

Watch the full broadcast below: