President Donald Trump addressed the Justice Department in Washington on Friday, March 14, 2025. He declared his intent to void the presidential pardons granted by President Joe Biden to individuals on the House Jan. 6 committee due to the use of an autopen for the signature. Trump stated on Truth Social that these pardons are considered null and void because they were not personally signed by Biden and were not properly explained or approved by him.
Legal experts argue that the President does not have the authority to overturn pardons from his predecessor based solely on the method of signature. Bernadette Meyler, a constitutional law expert, explained that the U.S. Constitution does not specify the form of a pardon, so the use of an autopen should not affect its validity. The practice of using an autopen for signing official documents is common and has been upheld by past administrations.
Trump’s criticism of the autopen signature also implies doubt about Biden’s awareness and cognitive ability when issuing the pardons. He insinuated that those on the committee may face investigation for their role in obtaining these pardons without Biden’s knowledge or approval. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reiterated this position during a Monday briefing, questioning Biden’s involvement in the signing of these pardons.
Concerns have been raised regarding the White House’s lack of evidence to support certain claims. When questioned about this, Leavitt advised the reporter to conduct their own investigation. Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey previously urged the DOJ to look into President Biden’s actions on March 5, questioning if his cognitive decline allowed decisions to be made without his knowledge. Experts suggest that if Trump attempted to prosecute someone who had been pardoned by the President, the case would likely be challenged in court. Despite potential issues with the autopen, it is unlikely that courts would invalidate the pardon. Biden’s public statements on these pardons make it difficult to argue that they were not his decisions. For further inquiries, please email us at letters@time.com.
