President Joe Biden’s final actions in office have set off a fierce debate in Washington. New revelations about the way he signed his last batch of pardons have put his leadership and transparency under the spotlight.
According to Fox News, Biden personally signed only one pardon—his son Hunter’s—while more than 1,500 others, including some of the most controversial, were authorized by autopen. This mechanical signature device has prompted allegations of misconduct, deception, and a possible cover-up regarding Biden’s mental fitness.
The Justice Department and President Donald Trump’s administration have both launched investigations into whether Biden’s aides misled the public about who was truly wielding executive power in his last weeks. The scale of the autopen’s use and its implications for government accountability have become a flashpoint.
Political opponents argue that the widespread use of the autopen signals more than just bureaucratic efficiency. President Trump has openly accused Biden’s aides of orchestrating a cover-up to hide the president’s mental decline, stating that the deployment of the autopen allowed staff to wield executive power in Biden’s name without his direct involvement.
Attorney General Pam Bondi has been directed by Trump to investigate whether Biden’s team intentionally misled the public and undermined the integrity of the office. The investigation seeks to determine if any laws were broken or if the president’s constitutional duties were delegated unlawfully during his last weeks in office.
Biden’s defenders counter that the autopen is a practical tool for handling large volumes of paperwork. However, critics maintain that the timing and secrecy surrounding its use—especially for such significant decisions—warrant closer scrutiny. They argue that pardons affecting national policy and high-profile individuals should require the president’s direct engagement.
The only individual to receive a hand-signed pardon from Joe Biden was his son Hunter, who had recently pleaded guilty to felony gun offenses and faced federal tax charges. Biden’s handwritten signature on Hunter’s blanket pardon stood in sharp contrast to the autopen signatures on all other clemency documents, sparking a wave of accusations about preferential treatment and political interference.
In his statement, Biden defended his decision as both a father and a president, expressing frustration at what he described as relentless and unfair prosecution: "From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted," the former president said.
Biden further accused his opponents of attempting to “break” both him and his son through a series of attacks, vowing that the effort to damage his family would not succeed. The pardon, covering offenses from January 2014 to December 2024, immediately shielded Hunter Biden from further federal prosecution.
Special Counsel David Weiss, who led the investigation into Hunter Biden, sharply criticized both the pardon and President Biden’s public remarks. Weiss asserted that Biden’s statements mischaracterized the yearslong probe and unfairly maligned career prosecutors at the Department of Justice.
Weiss’s report stated: "Other presidents have pardoned family members, but in doing so, none have taken the occasion as an opportunity to malign the public servants at the Department of Justice based solely on false accusations."
Weiss concluded that, given the pardon, no further charges could be pursued against Hunter Biden, and it would be inappropriate to comment on any potential additional indictments. His response has fueled further debate about the limits of presidential clemency and the consequences of criticizing federal law enforcement.
The fallout from Biden’s final acts in office is now set to play out in the courts and in public discourse. Attorney General Bondi’s investigation will examine whether Biden’s use of the autopen was lawful or a violation of presidential responsibility. The Department of Justice’s review is expected to focus on whether aides acted within the scope of their authority or engaged in a conspiracy to deceive the American people.
Biden’s defenders argue that the use of the autopen was a matter of necessity given the volume of clemency actions. Critics insist that the legitimacy of every pardon signed by the device is now in question and that the president’s mental and physical capacity must be fully disclosed.
Both sides are bracing for a lengthy battle over the legality and ethics of Biden’s actions, with potential implications for future presidencies. The controversy underscores the ongoing tension between tradition, transparency, and the evolving nature of presidential authority in the modern era.
