Former President Donald Trump recently claimed that President Joe Biden’s pardons are "void" because they were signed using an autopen, a machine that replicates a person’s signature. This assertion has sparked debates about the validity of presidential actions and whether the use of an autopen could undermine their legal standing.
Fact-checkers quickly turned to legal experts for clarification. The Constitution grants the President broad powers to issue pardons, and while the process of signing pardons traditionally involves the President’s personal signature, the use of an autopen is not uncommon for routine matters in the modern era. The Department of Justice has confirmed that the use of an autopen does not invalidate official actions as long as the President intends to authorize them.
In Biden’s case, his use of the autopen followed a long-standing practice dating back to previous administrations, including that of Trump himself. There is no legal precedent that explicitly voids pardons signed in this manner, and the courts have consistently upheld that the President's intent, rather than the method of signing, is what matters.
Critics of Trump’s claim argue that it is politically motivated, aiming to cast doubt on the legitimacy of Biden’s actions. Supporters, however, continue to question the integrity of using an autopen for such important decisions.
While the debate continues, legal analysts agree that Biden’s pardons are likely to stand up to scrutiny, with the autopen's use not posing a significant threat to their validity.