7 Explosive Revelations Behind Trump’s Move to Cancel Biden’s Autopen Orders which legal experts say have no clear constitutional basis. America’s political arena was shaken again this week after President Donald Trump announced that he is “cancelling” all executive orders and federal actions signed by Joe Biden using an autopen.
The dramatic declaration came through a lengthy Truth Social post in which Trump claimed that roughly 92 percent of Biden-era documents were not personally signed by the former president and therefore were “of no further force or effect.” The claim instantly ignited a political firestorm — not only because of its sweeping implications, but because legal experts almost unanimously consider the move unprecedented, questionable, and likely unenforceable.
Nonetheless, the announcement has already become another flashpoint in the long-running rivalry between Trump and Biden, and it has brought back into the spotlight an obscure but powerful tool of presidential administration: the autopen. This explainer unpacks the autopen controversy, the politics behind Trump’s claims, the legal realities, and what could be at stake for the functioning of the U.S. government.
7 Explosive Revelations Behind Trump’s Move to Cancel Biden’s Autopen Orders
Trump Declares Biden’s Autopen-Signed Documents “Terminated”
Trump’s post revisited an accusation he has been making for years — that Biden was not truly in control during his presidency, and that staff members used the autopen to approve major actions, including executive orders, pardons, proclamations, and federal directives.
In his Truth Social message, Trump wrote:
“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.”
He also warned that Biden could face perjury charges if he claimed to have personally approved the autopen signatures:
“If he says he was involved, he will be brought up on charges of perjury.”
Trump provided no evidence for the 92% figure, nor did he specify which documents he considered invalid. Yet the statement was delivered as a definitive presidential directive — raising immediate questions about legality, precedent, and practical consequences.
Why the Autopen Has Become a Political Weapon
The autopen is a simple mechanical device that replicates a handwritten signature using real ink. Presidents have used it for generations. The tool dates back at least to the early 19th century and has been used by presidents including:
- Thomas Jefferson
- George W. Bush
- Barack Obama
- Donald Trump
- Joe Biden
Despite this long history, Trump has weaponised the autopen issue to cast doubt on Biden’s mental acuity, decision-making, and physical involvement in presidential duties.
Trump’s “Walk of Fame” Jab at Biden
Earlier this year, Trump installed a “Presidential Walk of Fame” near the White House — but instead of placing Joe Biden’s portrait, he displayed a photograph of an autopen machine signing Biden’s name. The move symbolised Trump’s long-held claim that Biden was not making his own decisions.
Accusations of “Illegal Delegation”
Trump has repeatedly argued that using an autopen for official acts — especially pardons and executive orders — amounts to an illegal delegation of presidential authority. His critics note that many presidents, including Trump himself, used the device for signing correspondence and routine documents.
Legal experts say that the device’s use is fully permissible as long as the president authorises it.
What Exactly Is an Autopen and Why Is It Legal?
At its core, the autopen is a robotised pen mounted on a machine arm that follows a programmed path mimicking a signature. Its output is indistinguishable from a handwritten signature — and importantly, U.S. law has long acknowledged it as legitimate.
The DOJ’s 2005 Guidance
A defining document in this debate is a 2005 legal opinion issued by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel, which stated:
“The President need not personally perform the physical act of affixing his signature… The President may sign a bill by directing a subordinate to affix the President’s signature to such a bill, for example by autopen.”
This guidance was released under President George W. Bush’s administration. It confirmed that as long as the president authorises the signature, the physical act does not need to be performed by him.
Obama Was the First to Sign a Law Using Autopen
When Barack Obama signed a bill into law while traveling in Europe in 2011, it marked the first documented instance of legislation becoming law through autopen signature. Legal scholars at the time affirmed the practice’s legitimacy.
Past and Present Presidents Have Used It Routinely
Autopen use is not limited to major decisions — presidents use it for:
- Signing letters
- Issuing routine documents
- Sending acknowledgments
- Approving ceremonial messages
But they also use it for more than that. Both Obama and Biden authorised autopen signatures for executive actions, and Trump used it for some documents during his first term, though he later insisted it should be reserved for “insignificant matters.”
Why Trump Claims Biden’s Use Was Different
What makes Trump’s accusation politically potent is that he frames Biden’s use of the autopen as evidence of:
- Cognitive decline
- Lack of control over the presidency
- Improper delegation of presidential authority
- Possible wrongdoing by staffers
Trump’s political narrative suggests that Biden’s aides — whom he calls “Radical Left Lunatics” — made decisions that Biden did not personally approve.
He also claims Biden was unaware of certain pardons and executive actions signed using autopen. These include:
- Pardons for lawmakers Trump viewed as political adversaries
- Decisions connected to the January 6 investigation
- Military decisions criticised by Trump
- Directives related to COVID-19 policy
Biden has sharply rejected these accusations, saying:
“I made the decisions during my presidency… Any suggestion otherwise is ridiculous and false.”
Legal Experts Dismiss Trump’s Cancelation as Unconstitutional
Scholars across political and legal institutions have overwhelmingly stated that Trump’s declaration has no legal foundation.
Three major points undermine Trump’s argument:
The DOJ’s 2005 memo stands as evidence. So does longstanding practice across administrations.
2. Signatures aren’t even required for some presidential actions
Pardons, for example, do not require written signatures at all.
Constitutional law expert David Super explains:
“The Constitution does not require signatures for pardons. The president could verbally issue a pardon.”
3. A president cannot retroactively invalidate a predecessor’s lawful actions
Executive orders can be reversed going forward, but not on the basis of how they were signed.
Legal scholar Kermit Roosevelt put it succinctly:
“If the president knows what he is approving, the method of signature is irrelevant.”
Thus, even if Biden were ill, distracted, or relying on aides for implementation, the orders would remain valid unless there were proof he did not approve them — and no such evidence exists.
Has Trump Used an Autopen? Yes — and He Admitted It
Trump has acknowledged using an autopen himself.
He once said it should be used only for “very insignificant documents” such as:
- Letters to children
- Condolences
- Routine acknowledgments
- Messages of support
But his critics argue that Trump’s past use undermines his claim that autopen signatures are illegitimate or illegal.
The Political Context Behind the Autopen Controversy
Trump’s renewed focus on autopen usage comes amid broader political tensions around:
- Biden’s age
- Biden’s public stumbles
- Concerns about mental fitness
- Trump’s own lapses, fatigue issues, and aging
Biden’s Declining Public Perception
Biden faced intense scrutiny for perceived mental decline, especially after a widely panned performance at the June 2024 debate. Combined with his prostate cancer diagnosis and radiation treatment, the optics contributed to a narrative Trump has consistently pushed.
Trump Faces Similar Questions
Recent reporting — including a New York Times piece titled “Shorter Days, Signs of Fatigue: Trump Faces Realities of Aging in Office” — has raised parallel concerns about Trump’s stamina.
Trump blasted the report and the female journalist who wrote it, insisting he “aced” his cognitive exam.
Could Trump’s Move Actually Invalidate Biden’s Orders?
In a word: No.
Here are the reasons:
1. Presidents can reverse old executive orders — but not void them retroactively
A new president can replace or amend prior executive orders. They cannot declare them “invalid” simply because the previous president used a legally accepted method of signature.
2. Bills, pardons, and major directives are governed by constitutional processes
No court has ever invalidated a presidential action on the basis of autopen usage.
3. Trump’s threat of perjury charges is legally impossible
Biden cannot be prosecuted for denying Trump’s claims because:
- Presidential decision-making is protected
- Biden’s approvals were documented
- Perjury requires knowingly lying under oath
Trump’s statement is therefore a political warning, not a legal one.
What’s Really at Stake Behind Trump’s Autopen Campaign
This uproar is less about mechanical signatures and more about:
1. Challenging the legitimacy of Biden’s presidency
Trump has long pushed narratives that question Biden’s authority:
- Claims of cognitive decline
- Allegations of staff control
- Autopen accusations
- Attempts to invalidate pardons
- Attempts to void executive actions
2. Creating political doubt
If Trump can successfully frame Biden’s presidency as managed by aides rather than by Biden himself, it weakens Democrats politically.
3. Undermining trust in U.S. governance
The broader risk is that such claims erode public confidence in:
- Executive authority
- Presidential continuity
- Legal stability
- Administrative processes
4. Escalating partisan conflict
Trump’s announcement isn’t an isolated event — it’s part of a series of moves aimed at reframing policy battles as battles over legitimacy.
Conclusion — A Controversy Built on Politics, Not Law
Donald Trump’s claim that he is “cancelling” all Biden-era documents signed using an autopen has dominated the political conversation, but legal consensus remains firm:
- Autopen signatures are valid.
- Biden authorised the use of the autopen.
- Trump cannot retroactively void executive actions based on signature method.
- The law does not require handwritten signatures for presidential validity.
The controversy ultimately reflects deeper political tensions: questions of age, legitimacy, authority, and the fiercely personal rivalry between Trump and Biden.
While Trump’s declaration may energise his base and extend his narrative about Biden’s fitness, its legal impact is expected to be minimal. But its political impact? That story is still unfolding — and likely far from over.
