Washington is facing a sustained inquiry as subpoenas and federal reviews probe whether aides completed executive actions under the White House autopen, prompting renewed scrutiny of who wielded authority during President Biden’s later years.
At a Glance
- House Oversight Committee chairman James Comer subpoenaed three former senior aides and Biden’s physician to question autopen usage and mental acuity.
- Evidence cited in the inquiry suggests autopen-signed pardons and executive orders were issued when Biden may not have been directly involved.
- The Biden White House raised executive privilege and medical confidentiality objections to releasing testimony or internal communications.
- Former President Trump directed the DOJ and White House counsel to review the legality and authenticity of autopen-executed actions.
- A federal review of autopen use spans over one million documents from the National Archives and White House practice logs.
Congressional Scrutiny of Autopen Use
House Oversight Chair James Comer has subpoenaed Annie Tomasini, Anthony Bernal, Ashley Williams, and Dr. Kevin O’Connor as part of a widening probe into whether executive actions, including controversial pardons, were signed by autopen without President Biden’s direct involvement, according to a Washington Post report. Dr. O’Connor invoked the Fifth Amendment during initial testimony, citing patient confidentiality, further intensifying scrutiny, as detailed by AP News.
The inquiry also draws from the book Original Sin, which alleges that a tight circle of staffers functionally controlled the presidency during Biden’s final months, a claim highlighted in House Oversight Committee releases. Reports suggest that autopen was used for high-profile clemency decisions, including those for Dr. Anthony Fauci and General Mark Milley, as reported by ABC News.
Watch a report: Biden Autopen Controversy Explained
Federal Review and Trump Administration Response
In response to these concerns, President Trump ordered the Department of Justice and White House counsel to launch an official investigation into the authenticity of autopen-signed directives and the potential usurpation of presidential powers, as outlined in a White House fact sheet. This directive involves reviewing over one million pages of documents from the National Archives, with a focus on executive procedures and staff correspondence, a process described by The Daily Beast.
Despite the controversy, legal scholars note that autopen use is not unprecedented; it has been lawfully employed since the George W. Bush administration and continued under President Obama, provided there is prior presidential authorization, according to Time.
Implications for Presidential Power and Accountability
Experts remain divided on whether executive actions can be retroactively invalidated due to questions about cognitive fitness or procedural authenticity. Some caution that such efforts risk setting unstable precedents, while others argue that ensuring transparent governance justifies a thorough investigation, a debate captured by Washington Post analysis.
As the House committee hearings advance and the DOJ’s parallel review unfolds, the debate surrounding presidential authority, staff oversight, and constitutional integrity intensifies. The nation now watches closely to learn who held real power during the twilight of Biden’s presidency—and whether corrective measures are necessary to safeguard the executive branch from future overreach.