President Donald Trump has dropped a political bombshell by nullifying a staggering number of documents signed by former President Joe Biden with an autopen, calling their legitimacy into question, as the New York Post reports.
Trump's bold move, announced on Friday, targets nearly 92% of Biden’s documents, revokes numerous executive orders, and even casts doubt on last-minute pardons, while threatening legal action against Biden for potential perjury if he claims to have authorized the autopen's use.
For months, Trump, at 79, has painted Biden, now 83, as absent during his presidency, alleging that unelected aides ran the show without proper oversight. This narrative of a leaderless administration fuels Trump’s latest decree. It’s a sharp jab at a progressive legacy many conservatives see as built on shaky ground.
Trump’s stance hinges on the claim that autopen signatures lack validity unless explicitly approved by the president himself. He’s not mincing words, insisting that the vast majority of Biden’s paperwork is now “terminated.”
“Any document signed by Sleepy Joe Biden with the Autopen, which was approximately 92% of them, is hereby terminated, and of no further force or effect,” Trump declared. “The Autopen is not allowed to be used if approval is not specifically given by the President of the United States.” That’s a direct challenge to decades of precedent, but for many on the right, it’s a long-overdue correction.
Legal experts note that autopen signatures have carried full weight for years, as long as aides acted under presidential directive. A 2005 Justice Department analysis from the George W. Bush era backs this up, stating a president doesn’t need to personally sign bills for them to become law if a subordinate is directed to do so. Yet, Trump’s camp argues this hinges on proof of direct authorization -- proof they say is missing.
A House Republican-led probe from earlier this year found no hard evidence that Biden’s aides used the autopen without his blessing, but it did uncover troubling gaps. Circumstantial findings suggested Biden seldom engaged with key West Wing staff, leaving room for doubt about who was truly in charge. For conservatives, this smells like a bureaucracy gone rogue.
Internal emails from Biden’s team revealed some documentation of authorized signatures, but also hesitation among staff over how to handle verbal instructions on late-term clemency actions. This ambiguity only adds fuel to Trump’s fire. If instructions weren’t crystal clear, was the autopen wielded with true presidential intent?
Biden himself told the New York Times this year that he greenlit the use of his name for controversial last-minute pardons. But with a spokeswoman declining to comment now, skeptics on the right wonder if that’s the full story. Silence, in this case, isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement of transparency.
Trump isn’t just stopping at revocation -- he’s raising the stakes with a warning of perjury charges if Biden claims he directed the autopen’s use. It’s a legal threat that cuts deep, suggesting not just incompetence but potential deceit. For many conservative voters, it’s a call to hold leaders accountable, though critics might see it as overreach.
House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer has thrown his weight behind Trump’s decision, praising the move to invalidate these actions. “I applaud President Trump for deeming President Biden’s autopen actions null and void,” Comer stated. For Comer and like-minded lawmakers, this is about restoring trust in executive authority.
Comer also pointed to public concerns over Biden’s visible decline during his term, alleging aides hid the extent of his disengagement. While the specifics of how Trump’s blanket order will affect individual documents or pardons remain unclear, Comer’s support signals strong Republican backing. It’s a united front against what many on the right view as a deceptive progressive agenda.
The autopen, used by presidents for decades on everything from routine letters to rare legislation, now sits at the heart of a constitutional clash. Trump’s assertion that its use under Biden was largely unauthorized challenges not just one administration, but the very mechanisms of executive efficiency. For conservatives, it’s a chance to demand stricter accountability.
Yet, there’s a flip side -- disrupting such a long-standing practice could grind governance to a halt if every signature demands personal presidential ink.
Still, Trump’s base likely sees this as a necessary purge of questionable policies pushed by unelected hands. It’s a gamble, but one that resonates with those fed up with bureaucratic overreach.