Thousands of presidential pardons and commutations may be thrown into doubt after revelations that the Biden administration used an autopen instead of a personal signature, raising alarms about a direct assault on the Constitution’s checks and balances.

Senator Cruz Sounds the Alarm on Constitutional Integrity

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas delivered a scathing indictment of the Biden administration’s decision to use an autopen—essentially a mechanical signature device—for signing thousands of presidential pardons and commutations in late 2024 and early 2025. The move, revealed through internal records and whistleblower accounts, bypassed traditional presidential oversight and, according to Cruz, undermined a foundational check in the U.S. Constitution. The senator warned that such a practice “erodes the very guardrails that prevent executive overreach,” calling it a “potential constitutional crisis” at a scale never before witnessed in American history.

The uproar centers on the fact that, while autopen signatures have occasionally been used for routine government paperwork and even some legislation, their use for executive clemency—an act the Constitution specifically assigns to the president—remains virtually unprecedented. The Biden administration’s actions came amid a massive push for criminal justice reform, resulting in the commutation of about 1,500 sentences and 39 pardons in December 2024, followed by a record 2,500 additional commutations in January 2025. Reports confirmed that many of these documents were not signed by Biden himself, but by autopen, often without clear evidence of his direct review or approval.

Congressional Oversight and Partisan Battle Lines

The House Oversight Committee, chaired by Representative James Comer, has taken center stage in investigating these alleged constitutional violations. Committee staff have uncovered internal emails from within the Biden White House expressing concern over whether the use of autopen for such important actions met legal requirements. Former President Trump, along with key Republican leaders, have labeled the controversy a “historic scandal with massive repercussions,” while Biden’s former staff have dismissed these allegations as politically motivated attacks designed to score partisan points. The Department of Justice is also conducting a review but has not yet issued a definitive ruling on whether autopen-signed pardons are legally valid.

What distinguishes this scandal is not just the sheer number of clemency actions, but the bipartisan and institutional scrutiny it has triggered. Historically, even in moments of intense political division, both parties have respected the personal responsibility attached to the presidential signature—especially for life-altering decisions like pardons and commutations. The scale and method of these actions have left even some within the Democratic Party expressing quiet concern about long-term ramifications for executive authority and public trust.

Expert Opinions and Legal Uncertainty

Legal experts remain sharply divided. Some constitutional law scholars argue that so long as the president personally authorizes the use of the autopen, the action could stand, especially in an era of modern administrative efficiency. Others, however, point out that the framers of the Constitution intended the pardon power to be wielded directly and deliberately, as a safeguard against both tyranny and reckless leniency. The Department of Justice previously allowed autopen use for signing legislation, but there is no clear legal precedent for applying this practice to the presidential clemency process at such scale. This legal gray area has only deepened partisan divisions and fueled calls for urgent, clarifying judicial review.

Short-term, the status of thousands of released or pardoned individuals is now in limbo, and the justice system faces a wave of administrative and legal challenges. In the long run, the controversy threatens to erode faith in the presidency and set a precedent that could weaken constitutional safeguards for generations. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle acknowledge that the outcome of the ongoing investigations will shape the boundaries of executive power and determine whether the personal responsibility of the president can ever be delegated to a machine.

Broader Implications for the Rule of Law

The unfolding scandal is a stark reminder of what is at stake when core constitutional duties are treated as mere administrative chores. For conservative Americans, the news is a chilling affirmation of long-held fears about government overreach, the erosion of checks and balances, and the relentless push to bypass traditions that have kept the republic safe. As the investigations near their end, the nation now waits to see whether the system will restore trust and accountability or allow a dangerous precedent to stand. The legitimacy of the presidential pardon process—and the Constitution itself—hangs in the balance.

Ted Cruz torches Biden for 'partisan and personal motives' after bombshell report on autopen pardons https://t.co/lbt5sIwg7l

— Fox News Politics (@foxnewspolitics) September 9, 2025

Congressional leaders and grassroots advocates alike are demanding answers, not just for the sake of this administration, but to ensure that future presidents do not exploit technological shortcuts to circumvent solemn constitutional responsibilities. The debate over autopen-signed pardons is more than a legal technicality: it is a fundamental test of whether the executive branch will be bound by the same rules and standards that have long defined American governance.

Sources:

Ted Cruz torches Biden for ‘partisan and personal motives’ after bombshell report on autopen pardons

Comer vows accountability, Trump rips ‘scandal’ after bombshell report on Biden autopen pardons

Ted Cruz: Four years of Biden lawlessness, abuses end as autopen scandal rocks DC