Trump Cancels All Biden Executive Orders Signed With Autopen Device

President Trump announced Friday his decision to cancel all executive orders and directives signed by former President Joe Biden using an autopen, a mechanical device designed to replicate signatures. The move raises fundamental questions about executive authority and the constitutional requirements for presidential action.

“Any document signed” by Biden through an autopen “is hereby terminated, and of no further force or effect,” Trump declared. The president went further, stating that those who operated the autopen did so illegally and that Biden himself was not involved in the process. Trump added that if Biden claims otherwise, he would face perjury charges.

Here are the facts: Biden signed 162 executive orders during his presidency, according to the American Presidency Project. The exact number signed via autopen remains unclear, though the practice itself is not unprecedented. Trump has already rescinded nearly 70 of Biden’s executive orders shortly after his January 20 inauguration and another 19 on March 14.

The legal framework here matters. In 2005, the Justice Department under President George W. Bush determined that presidents can legally use autopens to sign bills into law. Presidents from both parties have employed this technology for years. Trump himself acknowledged in March that he has used an autopen, though “only for very unimportant papers.”

The distinction Trump appears to be drawing is not about the legality of autopens generally, but about whether Biden’s cognitive state during his presidency meant that others were making decisions without his knowledge or consent. Trump previously ordered an investigation into the Biden White House’s autopen use, alleging a conspiracy to conceal Biden’s cognitive decline through mechanical signatures on important documents including pardons.

Biden pushed back against these claims in July, stating unequivocally that he made all decisions during his presidency regarding pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations. He called suggestions otherwise “ridiculous and false.”

House Republicans released a report last month examining Biden’s autopen use. While the report criticized the practice, it did not provide definitive evidence that Biden’s aides conspired to sign laws or directives without his knowledge.

The constitutional question at the heart of this controversy is straightforward: Does a mechanically reproduced signature satisfy the requirement that the president personally approve executive actions? The answer has traditionally been yes, provided the president authorized the signature. The real issue Trump is raising is whether Biden actually authorized these signatures or whether his staff acted independently.

This is not merely about revoking a predecessor’s policies, which is standard practice for incoming presidents. Trump is questioning the legitimacy of the signature process itself, arguing that the autopen was used to mask Biden’s inability to perform his duties.

The practical implications are significant. If Trump’s cancellation stands, it could affect numerous Biden-era policies and decisions. Whether courts will uphold this wholesale cancellation based on the signature method rather than the substance of the orders remains to be seen.

What is clear is that Trump is forcing a long-overdue conversation about transparency in presidential decision-making and the limits of delegated authority in the executive branch.