President Donald Trump just lit a match under a mountain of Biden-era paperwork, declaring that every document signed with former President Joe Biden’s autopen is “null, void, and of no further force or effect.” In a Truth Social post this week, Trump claimed that executive orders, proclamations, memorandums, contracts—especially pardons and commutations—bearing an autopen version of Biden’s signature are now terminated.

The statement is sweeping, and intentionally so. Trump’s message argues that if the signature wasn’t personally authorized, then the act wasn’t presidential. The post singles out clemency grants, warning recipients that any pardon or commutation signed by autopen “has been fully and completely terminated” and carries “no Legal effect.”

Trump has been hinting at this move since questions about Biden’s autopen use first bubbled up in Congress. His broader claim is familiar: that Biden was not fully engaged in the job, and that aides and allied operatives were effectively steering the presidency while using the autopen to keep the machinery humming.

The flashpoint, of course, is Biden’s flurry of preemptive pardons in the final stretch of his term. Biden granted clemency to a range of high-profile figures—including family members and officials like Anthony Fauci, former Joint Chiefs Chair Mark Milley, and members of the January 6th committee—moves Republicans framed as political insulation ahead of Trump’s return.

But Trump’s camp is arguing that calling them “Biden’s pardons” is generous. The House Oversight Committee has spent much of 2025 probing whether Biden personally approved major autopen-signed actions. Chairman James Comer’s report alleges irregularities in the last-minute pardon process, and says investigators found no scheduled meetings showing Biden reviewed certain applicants before the autopen went to work.

In closed-door testimony, several senior Biden aides reportedly said they could not definitively identify who gave final approval on various autopen documents. One witness frequently referenced in reporting is former aide Neera Tanden, whose testimony contributed to claims of a foggy chain of command for some high-level decisions. Those revelations have become fuel for conservatives who say the autopen wasn’t just a convenience—it was a substitute president.

Other aides invoked the Fifth during testimony, and Biden’s physician declined to answer many questions about the former president’s mental and physical condition, deepening Republican suspicion that leadership was being quietly transferred to staff.

Outside government, the Heritage Foundation has pushed its own autopen investigation, arguing that the device was used broadly and sloppily, at minimum creating a paper trail problem and, at worst, enabling aides to enact policy without explicit presidential buy-in.

The accusation is blunt: that a parade of insiders “shoved documents left and right through that autopen” because they could, and because Biden’s capacity was allegedly compromised. Conservatives say the concern wasn’t new. They point back to 2020 and 2021, when public questions about Biden’s stamina and clarity were treated as taboo—first by the campaign, then by the White House, and frequently by friendly media.

That taboo, critics argue, was enforced by a communications machine that tried to label any cognitive questions as disqualifying bad faith. Former press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was repeatedly dismissive of the topic, and examples from her briefings are now being replayed as evidence of a deliberate cover-up.

Then Biden dropped out of the 2024 race, and the autopen controversy didn’t fade—it metastasized. Trump’s launch-day declaration is the capstone: a formal attempt to erase everything autopen-signed in one shot.

Legally, though, this is where the funhouse mirrors start appearing. A 2005 Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel opinion—still the executive branch’s guiding view—says a president may sign a bill by directing a subordinate to affix his signature, explicitly including use of an autopen.

Autopens have been used by multiple presidents of both parties, and courts have generally treated authorized autopen signatures as valid.

Constitutional experts cited in recent reporting also say a sitting president can’t simply revoke a predecessor’s pardons by fiat. For Trump to succeed, a court would likely need compelling evidence that Biden did not authorize specific acts—especially clemency decisions, which are among the most legally insulated presidential powers.

And that’s exactly why Trump allies want the fight. A court challenge triggers discovery. Depositions. Subpoenas. The whole ugly process that forces people to answer questions under oath about what Biden knew, when he knew it, and who was actually pushing paper through the autopen.

Bottom line: Trump just dropped the hammer and said every single thing that got rubber-stamped by Biden’s autopen is toast. Done. Null and void.

If the guy wasn’t even awake, aware, or in the room when his name got slapped on pardons for Hunter, Fauci, Milley, and the J6 clown show, then those aren’t presidential acts; they’re staffer fan-fiction.

Yeah, the courts are gonna freak out, and the same people who hid Joe behind plants and teleprompters will scream bloody murder. Let ’em.

Discovery’s coming, baby. Subpoenas, depositions, the whole circus. The truth about who was really running the country is finally getting dragged into the light.

America got played for four years. Time to hit undo.