Which presidents have used autopens and for what types of documents?
Executive summary
Autopen machines have been used by many U.S. presidents for decades to reproduce signatures on routine or time-sensitive documents; reported examples include Thomas Jefferson (early pantograph device), John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Gerald Ford, Barack Obama and Donald Trump (each used autopens for various documents) [1] [2] [3]. Modern controversy centers on Joe Biden’s late‑term use for some pardons, executive orders and time‑sensitive legislation while traveling, prompting Republican challenges and President Trump’s November 28, 2025, proclamation canceling Biden documents he says were autopen‑signed [4] [5] [3].
1. What the historical record shows: presidents who used signature machines
Presidential use of signature‑duplication devices stretches back more than two centuries: an early pantograph (called a polygraph) patent was held by John Isaac Hawkins in 1803 and Thomas Jefferson employed that kind of device extensively, establishing a precedent for mechanical duplication of presidential signatures [4] [1]. Lyndon B. Johnson openly used the autopen, Gerald Ford acknowledged using it, and John F. Kennedy’s frequent reliance made his genuine autograph unusually rare [1]. Modern presidents also have precedent: Barack Obama used an autopen to sign the Patriot Act renewal and an appropriations bill while abroad and during other time‑zone constraints, and Donald Trump admitted using the device for “very unimportant papers” [1] [6] [2].
2. What presidents typically use autopens to sign
Available reporting indicates autopens are used mainly for high‑volume, routine, or time‑sensitive items: constituent letters, certificates, routine proclamations, travel‑era legislation signings, and in some cases measures needed to avoid statutory lapses while the president is physically unavailable [6] [3] [2]. The Shapell Manuscript Foundation and news outlets cite examples of presidents using autopens to meet deadlines for appropriations or extensions of law while overseas or on travel [1] [3]. Sources say presidents often authorize autopen use for convenience and continuity, not to delegate decision‑making [6].
3. The legal and administrative backdrop: why autopen signatures have been treated as valid
A long‑standing Justice Department view, reflected in reporting about a 2005 opinion, has held that under certain conditions an autopen signature may be legally valid if an authorized official affixes the president’s signature template with the president’s approval — effectively treating mechanical affixation as an extension of the president’s signature practice [6] [7]. News reports note the device’s use has historically been accepted across administrations and that questions about legality arise mainly when critics argue the president did not personally authorize particular documents [6] [3].
4. The 2024–25 flashpoint: Biden, pardons, executive orders and political attack
Reporting in 2024–25 focuses on Joe Biden’s use of the autopen for certain late‑term pardons, executive actions and at least one funding extension while traveling; critics and Republican investigators argued this created doubts about whether he personally approved specific actions, while Biden and his team insisted he authorized decisions [3] [5] [2]. The House Oversight Committee and Republican voices amplified those doubts, producing a 2025 committee report that raised the issue publicly [8]. These disputes culminated in President Trump’s public declaration on Nov. 28, 2025, that he would cancel executive orders and other documents he says were signed with Biden’s autopen [5] [9].
5. Competing perspectives and political motivations
Mainstream outlets (CNN, NBC, PBS, The Guardian) report both factual history of autopen use and the partisan context: critics argue autopen use can undermine transparency and accountability, while defenders note longstanding legal opinions and decades of bipartisan use [5] [3] [9] [10]. Political actors pressing the autopen story have explicit motives: Republican investigators and President Trump frame autopen use as evidence of incapacity or illicit delegation, while proponents point to efficiency, legality (2005 DOJ opinion) and precedent — and Biden publicly denied any “cover‑up” and said he made those decisions [3] [5] [6].
6. What reporting does not say or cannot prove from these sources
The supplied sources do not provide a comprehensive list of every document each president signed with an autopen; there is no public, centralized ledger of autopen usage cited in these articles [3]. Available sources do not mention any final judicial ruling invalidating autopen‑signed presidential actions in the modern era; they do note legal debate, committee inquiries and political pronouncements [6] [4].
7. Bottom line for readers
Autopen use by presidents is a long‑established administrative practice used for speed and logistics and has been employed by presidents from Jefferson to Trump and Biden [1] [3] [2]. The law and precedent have long treated mechanically affixed signatures as potentially valid when authorized, but in 2024–25 autopen use became a partisan flashpoint: critics claim it disguised delegation or incapacity and seek to invalidate actions, while defenders point to routine necessity and longstanding DOJ guidance [6] [5] [9]. Readers should treat political claims about nullification and criminality cautiously and follow court rulings and formal DOJ opinions for definitive legal outcomes — those are not present in the current reporting [6] [3].