Autopen Controversy Raises Questions About Biden’s Authority and Cognitive State

WASHINGTON — An internal controversy surrounding the use of an autopen to sign official documents by former President Joe Biden has sparked intense scrutiny regarding his cognitive awareness during his final month in office.

Sources from within the Biden administration have indicated that a key aide may have exceeded their authority by unilaterally deciding which documents to sign using the mechanical signature device. This revelation has surfaced amid newly established autopen regulations under former President Donald Trump, which reportedly create more stringent limits on its use.

The Post obtained a document outlining the specific limitations regarding the use of the autopen, including restrictions that prevent its application to certain presidential actions such as executive orders and nominations. The concerns over Biden’s decision-making capabilities, coupled with his advancing age, have raised questions about whether aides took liberties in determining his wishes.

One Biden White House source expressed suspicion that the aide acted independently in their use of the autopen, stating, “I feared no one as much as I feared that [staffer]. To me, [the staffer] basically was the president.” The source emphasized that colleagues often refrained from questioning the aide’s authority and sought clarity on whether directives genuinely originated from Biden himself.

Another source affirmed similar concerns, mentioning that the aide frequently claimed to represent the president’s interests without an evident line of communication to Biden. According to this individual, “Everyone was suspicious of [the aide] exceeding their authority,” yet no one was prepared to voice those concerns publicly.

Advocates for tighter regulations contend that misuse of the autopen could potentially cross into criminal territory. Noted attorney Mike Davis remarked, “If they’re not carrying out the president’s will, it’s a huge issue — it’s criminal,” highlighting potential avenues for forgery or obstruction of justice.

In a memo distributed to White House staff, Trump staff secretary William Scharf delineated the restrictive criteria for autopen usage, declaring that the Trump administration’s practices exceed those of previous administrations. Scharf emphasized that all significant documents would be personally signed by the president in the presence of witnesses, reflecting a commitment to ensure that presidential authority remains intact.

Autopen signatures have a long history in the White House, with usage traced back to President Lyndon Johnson for signing informal letters. However, Biden’s tenure saw its broader application for legal and official documents, including last-minute pardons. Some aides described instances of bizarre requests for signatures on unique objects, underscoring the quirky applications of the autopen.

Concerns about Biden’s cognitive capacity have been persistent throughout his presidency. Critics, including Republican Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, have suggested these issues warrant a Department of Justice investigation into the actions taken by Biden’s staff, potentially challenging the legitimacy of executive orders and other significant decisions during a time when Biden’s faculties were in question.

As discussions surrounding the autopen’s use continue, more probing conversations about the responsibilities and limits placed on presidential aides have emerged, particularly concerning an increasingly complex political landscape. Historical precedence of autopen usage remains a focal point for evaluating the boundaries of authority within the executive branch, but Biden’s situation has ignited renewed debate over transparency and accountability.

Indeed, as Biden moves forward from the presidency, the implications of this controversy may continue to resonate, shaping perceptions of leadership and operational integrity at the highest levels of government.