I am so happy that we will be able to void trump's pardons. This is great.
Donald Trump 'voids' Joe Biden's pardons after former president used autopen signature
- Thread starter serendipity
- Start date
volsrocks
Verified User
Prove Trumps signature is fake ,,,you can
Yes, signatures produced by an autopen, a machine that replicates a signature, are generally considered not authentic and are often seen as fake.
AProudLefty
The remora of JPP
Prove he signed 1600+.
Absolutely no need. We just need to get a Democrat as President, and he can declare them void. trump did not go to the courts with proof of anything, he just used his new presidential powers, which a Democrat will one day have, to declare them void.
This is the best news I have heard in weeks.
volsrocks
Verified User
do u know what the word ALL means?
AI Overview
Learn more
"All" can refer to the entirety or every member of a group
Seems like an issue for the SCOTUS Squad the Superheroes of the Constitution...
Our intrepid superheroes of the Constitution have ruled on this somewhat, while it isn't autopen, in United States v. Wilson (1833) they ruled that a pardon could be refused, but in the ruling made it clear that it is the "intent to pardon" that matters on the issuance of a pardon. So...
I believe that if the autopen was used with the President's approval of the pardon the intent is served and the pardon would stand so long as it was accepted by the party who was pardoned.
volsrocks
Verified User
No need to go to court
Autopen is a fake sig
If it was real than George Washington’s autopen sig would be worth millions
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
A POTUS who is fully mentally aware may use an autopen. This isn’t up for debate.
What has not been decided, as it’s unprecedented: what is the legal status of pardons that a braindead POTUS with dementia supposedly "signed"?
AProudLefty
The remora of JPP
Then the 1600+ signatures can be refused. I love precedents!
ZenMode
Well-known member
opinion stated as fact.
opinion stated as fact
opinion stated as fact, as is the basis for the ridiculous claim that Biden wasn't president.
If it were possible to be given 4 strikes, you just did it.
I believe that at least one lady did refuse her pardon. She wanted the SCOTUS to rule on her case. Any pardon can be refused, the SCOTUS ruled again in 1915 that the Pardon is a "deed" they reiterated that position, that a pardon can be refused.
AProudLefty
The remora of JPP
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
A presidential autopen signatures' validity depends on the context, but legally, it’s not inherently invalid for many purposes.
The autopen—a machine that replicates a person’s signature—has been used by U.S. presidents since at least Dwight Eisenhower’s administration in the 1950s, often for routine correspondence, photos, or minor documents. It’s a time-saver, not a forgery, since it’s authorized by the president.
For official legal documents—like bills becoming law—the Constitution (Article I, Section 7) requires the president to sign them to enact legislation, but it doesn’t specify how the signature must be applied.
Courts have never struck down a law because an autopen was used, though it’s rare for high-stakes documents.
A notable exception was in 2011 when Barack Obama used an autopen to sign an extension of the Patriot Act while abroad.
The Justice Department issued a memo defending it, arguing that intent and authorization matter more than the physical act, and no legal challenge succeeded.
@Grok
There’s no historical evidence that George Washington used an autopen. The autopen, a machine designed to automatically sign documents, wasn’t invented until the early 19th century—well after Washington’s death in 1799. The first known patent for such a device came in 1803, credited to John Isaac Hawkins, though practical use didn’t become widespread until much later.
Washington did, however, rely heavily on secretaries and aides to manage his correspondence, especially during his presidency. Men like Tobias Lear and Alexander Hamilton often drafted letters for him, and he’d sign them by hand. His signatures vary in appearance due to factors like fatigue, haste, or the sheer volume of documents—over 100,000 letters are attributed to him—but that’s just human inconsistency, not a machine. If you’re curious about a specific document or signature, feel free to point me toward it, and I can dig deeper!
@Grok
Exactly, no need to go to court. Future presidents get to decide whether trump's pardons should be voided or not. This gives me hope, thank you.
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
Salty Walty is missing the point.
Autopen usage isn't the core issue, it's braindead Biden's mental acuity that's being questioned.
volsrocks
Verified User
The President and the Autopen: It is Unconstitutional for Someone or Something to Sign a Bill Outside of the President's Presence
In sum, the President’s use of the auto-pen (or even a human being) to sign a bill outside of the President’s presence is unconstitutional. This establishes a dangerous precedent, one which every thinking lawyer in Washington politics seemed to have overlooked. Let the auto-pen episode not be a precedent for this or any other President to follow. The Constitution does not allow for shortcuts.
The President and the Autopen: It is Unconstitutional for Someone or Something to Sign a Bill Outside of the President's Presence
On May 26, 2011, only hours before three provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act were scheduled to expire, Congress passed an extension. For day
papers.ssrn.com
A pardon is not a bill, this would not apply, and rulings of the past have made it clear that it is "intent" and not the "signature" that makes the pardon...The President and the Autopen: It is Unconstitutional for Someone or Something to Sign a Bill Outside of the President's Presence
In sum, the President’s use of the auto-pen (or even a human being) to sign a bill outside of the President’s presence is unconstitutional. This establishes a dangerous precedent, one which every thinking lawyer in Washington politics seemed to have overlooked. Let the auto-pen episode not be a precedent for this or any other President to follow. The Constitution does not allow for shortcuts.
The President and the Autopen: It is Unconstitutional for Someone or Something to Sign a Bill Outside of the President's Presence
On May 26, 2011, only hours before three provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act were scheduled to expire, Congress passed an extension. For daypapers.ssrn.com
I will also add that no challenges to any bill signed by autopen has ever succeeded.
Into the Night
Verified User
It's the law, moron.
It's the law, moron.
Biden was never elected. He was never President. Too many States never chose their electoral college members.
Argument of the Stone fallacy.
Into the Night
Verified User
An autopen is not a signature. It is a machine that anyone can use to forge documents.
The point is also moot. You cannot 'pardon' someone that is not convicted.
Biden was also never President since he was never elected. He had no pardon authority.