Former President Trump’s accusation that President Biden’s pardons are void because they were signed using an autopen has been debunked by BBC Verify and legal authorities. While Trump alleges these pardons lack legitimacy, substantial evidence points to numerous instances where Biden signed pardons by hand.
Trump’s Claims of Void Biden Pardons Questioned by Experts
Trump’s Claims of Void Biden Pardons Questioned by Experts
A recent statement from Trump about Biden's pardons being invalid due to autopen signatures lacks evidence and is challenged by legal experts.
Article:
Former President Donald Trump has made headlines with his assertion that many of President Joe Biden's pardons are void, claiming they were signed using an autopen—a device that replicates a person's signature—rather than being handwritten. This statement, shared on his Truth Social platform, has sparked scrutiny as Trump did not present any supporting evidence.
BBC Verify conducted an investigation and found numerous instances where President Biden did indeed sign pardons with his own hand. Visual documentation from official White House photographs demonstrates that Biden signed several high-profile pardons, including one for individuals imprisoned for marijuana possession in October 2022.
Trump's statement alludes to a broader narrative where he has referred to an "unselect committee" investigating the January 6 riots, further criticizing Biden's pardoning actions involving his family members. Despite these claims, experts have reiterated that U.S. law does not render pardons invalid simply because they were signed using autopen.
Furthermore, previous administrations, including those of Presidents Bush, Obama, and Truman, have utilized autopen technology for various documents without any controversy regarding their legality. Indeed, a 2005 Department of Justice memorandum clarified that autopen signatures are permissible for presidential documents.
Legal analysts emphasize that Trump’s attempt to declare Biden's pardons void would conflict with established constitutional norms. Professor Erin Delaney pointed out that revoking a predecessor’s pardons is an extremely rare occurrence. Furthermore, targeting these pardons based on the method of signing could open challenging constitutional questions about the legitimacy of many other government documents signed with similar techniques.
The narrative surrounding autopen signatures attempts to underline a potential political strategy from Trump, yet the lack of substantial evidence and the pushback from legal scholars suggest his claims might be more speculative than factual. As the political discourse continues, all eyes remain on both the implications of these pardons and the ongoing investigations tied to the January 6 events.
Former President Donald Trump has made headlines with his assertion that many of President Joe Biden's pardons are void, claiming they were signed using an autopen—a device that replicates a person's signature—rather than being handwritten. This statement, shared on his Truth Social platform, has sparked scrutiny as Trump did not present any supporting evidence.
BBC Verify conducted an investigation and found numerous instances where President Biden did indeed sign pardons with his own hand. Visual documentation from official White House photographs demonstrates that Biden signed several high-profile pardons, including one for individuals imprisoned for marijuana possession in October 2022.
Trump's statement alludes to a broader narrative where he has referred to an "unselect committee" investigating the January 6 riots, further criticizing Biden's pardoning actions involving his family members. Despite these claims, experts have reiterated that U.S. law does not render pardons invalid simply because they were signed using autopen.
Furthermore, previous administrations, including those of Presidents Bush, Obama, and Truman, have utilized autopen technology for various documents without any controversy regarding their legality. Indeed, a 2005 Department of Justice memorandum clarified that autopen signatures are permissible for presidential documents.
Legal analysts emphasize that Trump’s attempt to declare Biden's pardons void would conflict with established constitutional norms. Professor Erin Delaney pointed out that revoking a predecessor’s pardons is an extremely rare occurrence. Furthermore, targeting these pardons based on the method of signing could open challenging constitutional questions about the legitimacy of many other government documents signed with similar techniques.
The narrative surrounding autopen signatures attempts to underline a potential political strategy from Trump, yet the lack of substantial evidence and the pushback from legal scholars suggest his claims might be more speculative than factual. As the political discourse continues, all eyes remain on both the implications of these pardons and the ongoing investigations tied to the January 6 events.
