The recent uproar surrounding former President Biden’s alleged late-night pardoning spree has set tongues wagging. At the heart of the controversy is the House Oversight Committee’s report that suggests the then-President may have used an autopen in a questionable manner during his closing days in office. Critics are abuzz, calling for these actions to be rendered null and void, and the report points to murkier waters in the realm of presidential clemency powers. One can’t help but wonder what other presidential rules and regulations might still be operating on autopilot.
As the news unfurls, it appears that some of Biden’s aides might have gotten a bit too pen-happy, possibly using the autopen to sign off on pardons unbeknownst to Biden himself. Now, the House Oversight Committee wants the Justice Department to do a thorough investigation into this matter. It does leave one wondering who was really running the show in the final hours. It’s not every day one hears of unelected aides possibly doling out pardons like candy at a parade, and all this without much hoopla or oversight.
The constitutional right to grant pardons is a power reserved for the President, and only the President. Yes, the autopen, an interesting modern invention, has been used by past presidents, but they were presumably aware of what was being signed with it. The main contention here isn’t the fact that the autopen was used—it’s the suggestion that it might have been used without proper oversight or approval from Biden himself. It raises an eyebrow or two about what limits, if any, there are to make sure such powers aren’t wielded without due process.
Skepticism is unsurprisingly present, with some experts like Andy McCarthy pointing out the challenges of pursuing a prosecution, given Biden’s apparent assertion that he had approved all the autopen-endorsed pardons. Yet, this doesn’t stifle the desire for a little transparency and accountability. Is it too far-fetched to propose some checks and balances on the use of the autopen, or is Congress destined to let this be another tale of presidential privilege spiraling into potential misadventure?
The incident, dramatically dubbed by some as the “autopen presidency,” has sparked discussions about the very nature of presidential pardon powers. While some ponder whether it’s time to revisit these powers and their uses, others look back at infamous pardons over the years with a sigh of exasperation. In times past, presidential clemency has been known to stir some discontent, and this current fracas is no exception. Perhaps Congress will step up and investigate these so-called abuses, ensuring that any future presidential signatures, autopen or not, are genuinely what they claim to be. After all, the reputation of the presidency should surely be more than just a stroke of a pen.
