Congress Investigates Alleged Widespread Autopen Use in Biden Administration

Washington, D.C. – Congressional investigators have launched a formal inquiry into allegations that an autopen—a mechanical device used to replicate signatures—was employed extensively to sign official documents, including controversial preemptive pardons, during President Joe Biden’s administration.

Oversight Committee Action and Key Allegations

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer confirmed that the committee is actively probing the circumstances surrounding the use of the autopen in the final days of Biden’s presidency. Comer stated that individuals responsible for operating the device have been identified, raising new questions about accountability and transparency within the executive branch.

Sources close to the investigation allege that nearly all documents bearing President Biden’s signature, with the notable exception of his withdrawal letter from the 2024 presidential race, were signed mechanically. This has prompted concerns among lawmakers about who authorized the use of the autopen and whether the president was aware of or involved in these decisions.

Whistleblower and Evidence Claims

Adding to the controversy, a whistleblower reportedly from the D.C. police has provided evidence suggesting that President Biden was not physically present at the White House when some of the pardons were signed. This claim has intensified scrutiny, with critics arguing that unelected officials may have been making consequential decisions in the president’s absence.

Political and Legal Reactions

Former President Donald Trump has seized on the allegations, claiming that the use of the autopen was exploited by political opponents to advance their agendas without proper oversight. Trump has repeatedly asserted—without providing direct evidence—that pardons and other official acts executed via autopen are "void" and lack legal force, especially those related to members of the House committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack and Biden family members.

However, legal experts and fact-checkers have pushed back on these claims. The U.S. Constitution does not require that presidential pardons be signed by hand, and the use of autopens by presidents has historical precedent dating back decades. Notably, Barack Obama, John F. Kennedy, and even Thomas Jefferson utilized autopens or similar devices for official business. The Department of Justice has previously affirmed that a president may authorize a subordinate to affix his signature to documents, including legislation and pardons.

There is no constitutional mechanism to overturn pardons once granted, regardless of whether an autopen was used, said Jay Wexler, a constitutional law professor at Boston University.

Transparency Demands and Ongoing Investigation

Despite the legal consensus, the Oversight Committee and political opponents continue to demand greater transparency regarding the authorization and oversight of autopen use in the Biden White House. The investigation remains ongoing, with lawmakers seeking to clarify the chain of command and ensure that presidential authority was not improperly delegated or exploited.

The White House has not issued a detailed response to the latest allegations. Meanwhile, the controversy continues to fuel partisan debate over executive power, presidential fitness, and the legitimacy of official acts performed during Biden’s tenure.