President Donald Trump has escalated political tensions by declaring that all presidential pardons issued by Joe Biden using an autopen are null and void.
This unprecedented move has thrown high-profile pardons, including those granted to General Mark Milley, Dr. Anthony Fauci, and members of the January 6th Committee, into uncertainty.
At the heart of the dispute is the use of an autopen, a device that replicates a president’s signature without requiring their physical presence. While autopen usage for signing laws and official documents has precedent, Trump’s argument is that pardons require direct, personal approval and cannot be delegated to a machine. Legal scholars are already debating whether Trump has the authority to invalidate pardons granted by a previous administration.
The “Pardons” that Sleepy Joe Biden gave to the Unselect Committee of Political Thugs, and many others, are hereby declared VOID, VACANT, AND OF NO FURTHER FORCE OR EFFECT, because of the fact that they were done by Autopen. In other words, Joe Biden did not sign them but, more…
— Donald J. Trump Posts From His Truth Social (@TrumpDailyPosts) March 17, 2025
Trump’s declaration has sparked legal scrutiny, with constitutional experts questioning whether a sitting president can unilaterally revoke pardons issued by a predecessor. Some argue that unless fraud or coercion can be proven, Biden’s pardons remain legally binding. Others claim that if a pardon was not personally signed by the president, its validity could be challenged in court.
Politically, this move is fueling partisan battles. Trump’s supporters are praising the move as a correction of what they see as politically motivated pardons, while Biden allies insist this is a dangerous overreach with no legal basis.
The Justice Department is expected to weigh in, and court battles are almost certain. If Trump’s claim is upheld in any form, it could set a precedent that changes how presidential pardons are issued moving forward. Meanwhile, the individuals affected by this declaration may challenge the decision legally, prolonging the controversy.
One thing is clear: this fight over presidential power is far from over.
