President Trump Goes There, Says Whoever Used Biden’s Autopen “Usurped the Power of the Presidency”

| Published May 28, 2025

The controversy surrounding President Joe Biden’s use of an autopen—a device that replicates a person’s signature—to sign executive actions and pardons has intensified, drawing significant political and legal scrutiny.

Trump’s Allegations and Claims

Former President Donald Trump has labeled the use of the autopen as “the biggest scandal in American history” since the 2020 election. He asserts that the device was employed by unidentified individuals to authorize controversial policies without Biden’s direct consent, effectively “usurping the power of the presidency.” Trump contends that decisions made through the autopen, such as policies on open borders and transgender rights, were actions that “a Joe Biden, of sound mind, would have never done” .

House Oversight Committee’s Investigation

House Oversight Chairman James Comer has intensified investigations into the matter, focusing on whether Biden’s aides concealed his mental decline and misused the autopen. Comer has identified five individuals allegedly involved in this concealment:

• Dr. Kevin O’Connor, Biden’s White House physician

• Neera Tanden, former Director of the Domestic Policy Council

• Anthony Bernal, senior advisor

• Annie Tomasini, former deputy chief of staff

• Ashley Williams, former deputy director of Oval Office operations

Comer has called for testimonies from these individuals to determine the extent of their involvement in the alleged cover-up and the use of the autopen .

Legal Perspectives on Autopen Usage

The use of an autopen by U.S. presidents is not unprecedented. In 2011, President Barack Obama authorized the use of an autopen to sign a four-year extension of the USA PATRIOT Act while he was abroad, marking the first time a president used an autopen to sign legislation into law. This action sparked debates about its constitutionality, but a 2005 Department of Justice opinion affirmed that the president may sign a bill by directing that his signature be affixed to it, including through an autopen .

Despite this precedent, Trump and his allies argue that Biden’s use of the autopen, particularly if done without his direct knowledge, raises serious constitutional concerns. They claim that such actions could render the signed documents, including pardons, “null and void” .

The implications of the Biden autopen controversy are significant on several fronts—constitutional, political, and procedural:

1. Constitutional Implications

• Separation of Powers: If it’s proven that executive actions were signed without Biden’s knowledge or direction, it could be seen as a breach of Article II of the Constitution, which vests executive power solely in the president.

• Precedent Setting: This raises questions about the limits of proxy authority in presidential duties—how far can aides go using tools like the autopen?

2. Political Implications

• Fuel for Impeachment or Hearings: House Republicans may use this as justification to pursue deeper investigations or impeachment inquiries based on claims of incapacity or unlawful delegation of authority.

• 2024 Election Reverberations: Though the election has passed, narratives built around this could influence future campaigns, undermining public confidence in the Democratic leadership.

3. Legal and Administrative Implications

• Validity of Executive Orders or Pardons: If courts determine Biden didn’t personally authorize actions signed by autopen, affected policies or pardons could face legal challenges or reversals.

• Accountability of White House Staff: Aides like Neera Tanden or Dr. Kevin O’Connor may face legal scrutiny if proven they bypassed or concealed Biden’s intent.

4. Public Trust and Governance

• Crisis of Legitimacy: This could intensify public concerns about Biden’s mental fitness and raise fears that the government is being run by unelected staff.

• Media Polarization: Outlets like The Gateway Pundit drive the narrative, but coverage remains deeply divided—left-leaning outlets downplay it, while right-leaning ones amplify it.

The Oversight Project also has gathered every document they could find with Biden’s signature – ALL used the same autopen signature except for the announcement that he was dropping out of the 2024 election.

Overall Takeaway:

The Biden autopen controversy is that it exposes deep concerns about presidential authority, transparency, and potential overreach by unelected staff. While the autopen has precedent in modern presidencies, its use in this context—paired with claims of cognitive decline and lack of direct authorization—elevates it from a procedural tool to a political flashpoint.

This issue isn’t just about a signature—it’s about whether the president is truly in charge of decisions affecting national policy. If credible evidence emerges showing Biden did not knowingly authorize actions taken under his name, it could lead to lasting damage to institutional trust and provoke constitutional and legal challenges.

SOURCES: THE GATEWAY PUNDIT – President Trump Goes There, Says Whoever Used Biden’s Autopen “Usurped the Power of the Presidency”

STRAIGHT ARROW NEWS – House lawmakers revive questions about Biden’s mental fitness, allege cover-up

ABC NEWS – Top Republican requests interviews with Biden’s White House physician, former aides on his mental fitness

THE TIMES OF INDIA – Why Trump calls Autopen use the ‘biggest scandal’ since 2020 election

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL – House Republicans Revive Investigation of Biden’s Decline