President Donald Trump escalated a long-running claim about Joe Biden's use of an autopen, insisting that he intends to cancel every executive order that was not signed by Biden's hand. His declaration appeared in a lengthy post on Truth Social, reviving a dispute that legal scholars have repeatedly dismissed as baseless.
Trump argued that 'approximately 92 per cent' of Biden's documents were signed by an autopen, although he did not explain how that figure was calculated. He also said the autopen operators acted 'illegally' and warned that Biden could face perjury charges if he said he approved the signatures. His post came after months of similar allegations, which have circulated widely among supporters online.
The political impact of the claim is significant because Trump framed the autopen as a symbol of what he calls a presidency controlled by aides. He previously ordered an investigation into Biden's autopen usage, and his latest message provides the clearest indication that he wants to use the issue as justification for rolling back large parts of Biden's presidential record.
Information about Trump's announcement and the broader controversy was first reported by CNN.
What the Law Actually Says About the Autopen
The autopen is a mechanical device that replicates a signature in real ink. Although it is used today in a modern robotic form, the concept dates back to the early nineteenth century.
According to past guidance from the US Justice Department, a president does not need to physically sign a document for it to carry legal force. The guidance was issued during George W. Bush's administration and states that the president may direct aides to apply his signature using the device.
The rule has shaped practice across several administrations. John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama all used automated signature devices to process high volumes of documents. Even Trump acknowledged earlier this year that he had used an autopen on "unimportant papers."
These details are also outlined in reporting by The Guardian.
Why Biden's Use Became a Political Flashpoint
Trump has argued for months that Biden's autopen use signals cognitive decline or a lack of control over his own government. His supporters have promoted images of the device as evidence of a deeper conspiracy, although Republican investigations have found no proof that Biden failed to approve decisions made in his name.
A Republican-led oversight committee released a lengthy report on the issue last month. It claimed that staff members may have signed certain documents without Biden's involvement, yet the report did not present evidence showing that the former president was unaware of the actions. Democrats described the findings as a political stunt.
Biden defended himself in a March interview, saying he made every decision personally and instructed aides to use the autopen for clemency warrants because of the volume of cases.
Can Trump Void Biden's Orders?
While Trump can reverse executive orders through new directives, he cannot invalidate pardons or undo legislation. Constitutional scholars have stressed that executive authority has limits, and the president has no power to retroactively nullify past presidential pardons.
Legal experts say Trump's threat to cancel all autopen-signed documents lacks a mechanism for enforcement. Many of Biden's executive actions underpin federal programmes, agency rules and long-term policy. Undoing them would require new procedures, and in many cases, collaboration with Congress or the courts.
Why Trump Is Still Pushing the Theory
Trump continues to make the autopen a central talking point because it ties together several political narratives. By suggesting that Biden did not control his presidency, Trump portrays himself as undoing an illegitimate era of governance. The claim also reinforces broader messaging about Biden's age and capability, themes that Trump has repeatedly emphasised.
Although the autopen dispute lacks a clear legal basis, it is likely to remain politically relevant. It illustrates how minor administrative tools can become symbols of wider mistrust and how misinformation can shape public dialogue during an already polarised period in US politics.
