How many pardons did biden autopen sign
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Was this fact-check helpful?
1. Summary of the results
The question about how many pardons Biden signed with an autopen cannot be definitively answered based on the available analyses, as none of the sources provide a specific number of autopen-signed pardons. However, the analyses reveal several key facts about Biden's pardon practices and the autopen controversy.
Biden granted a total of 80 pardons during his four-year presidency [1], making this the second lowest number of pardons on record, with only George H.W. Bush granting fewer at 74 pardons [1]. The complete list of these 80 pardons is documented by the Department of Justice, with the most recent pardons granted on January 19, 2025 [2].
More significantly, Biden granted clemency to 4,245 people total, with more than 95% of those actions occurring in the final 3½ months of his presidency [3]. This massive volume of clemency actions included not just pardons but also commutations and other forms of clemency. Many of these actions were signed using an autopen [3], though the exact breakdown between pardons and other clemency actions signed with the device remains unclear.
The autopen usage became particularly controversial because Biden used it to sign clemency actions for his family members [4], raising questions about the appropriateness of using an automated signature device for such significant presidential actions. Biden officials themselves raised concerns about how he issued pardons and used the autopen [3], suggesting internal disagreement about these practices.
2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints
The analyses reveal significant missing context that transforms this from a simple numerical question into a broader constitutional and political controversy. Trump has cast doubt on the validity of pardons and other documents signed by Biden with an autopen [5], claiming that some of Biden's final-hour pardons were 'void, vacant' because they were signed using an autopen [6].
This dispute has escalated beyond mere criticism, as Trump has ordered an investigation into Biden's actions and autopen use [7]. The controversy has even reached symbolic levels, with Trump displaying an autopen picture for Biden's 'Walk of Fame' White House portrait [7], effectively replacing Biden's traditional presidential portrait with an image of the automated signature device [6].
The timing aspect adds crucial context often overlooked in discussions of presidential pardons. While Biden issued relatively few traditional pardons compared to other presidents, the concentration of clemency actions in his final months represents an unprecedented last-minute surge. This pattern raises questions about whether the autopen was used as a time-saving measure to process the enormous volume of clemency decisions.
Legal experts and constitutional scholars would likely have varying opinions on whether autopen-signed pardons carry the same legal weight as hand-signed documents, but this perspective is notably absent from the current analyses. The constitutional implications of automated presidential signatures on such consequential documents represent uncharted legal territory.
3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement
The original question contains an inherent assumption that may reflect incomplete understanding of the broader clemency picture. By focusing specifically on "pardons" signed with an autopen, the question potentially minimizes the larger controversy surrounding Biden's use of automated signatures for the much larger volume of 4,245 total clemency actions [3].
The question's framing might also reflect political bias by implying impropriety in autopen usage without acknowledging that autopens have been used by presidents for decades for various documents. However, the analyses suggest this case may be different due to the unprecedented volume and timing of the clemency actions [3].
The question fails to acknowledge the legal and constitutional questions raised by Trump's challenges to autopen-signed documents [6], which represent a significant development in presidential power and document authentication. By focusing solely on numbers, the question overlooks the broader implications for presidential authority and the validity of executive actions.
Additionally, the question doesn't address the internal concerns raised by Biden's own officials [3], suggesting potential administrative or procedural issues that extend beyond simple signature methods. This omission could reflect either incomplete research or intentional framing to avoid more complex aspects of the controversy.