Trump Orders Review of Biden Documents Signed by Autopen, Warns of Possible Perjury Charges
President Trump ordered a June 2025 review of executive actions allegedly signed by President Biden using an autopen, warning that false statements about authorization could prompt perjury referrals as investigators scrutinize clemencies, orders and record-keeping.
- Executive review ordered: A White House memorandum directed agencies to identify autopen-signed items and who authorized their use.
- Oversight findings: A House Oversight Committee staff report alleges concealed decline, irregular records and questionable pardons and commutations.
- Potential criminal referrals: Republicans asked the DOJ to review possible crimes and warned that false testimony about autopen authorization could lead to perjury charges.
Trump administration actions on autopen-signed documents
In June 2025, President Trump issued a memorandum directing a broad review of documents allegedly signed with an autopen during the Biden White House. The directive asked agencies to identify clemency grants, executive orders, memoranda and other actions that may have been signed by autopen and to report who ordered its use.
The memorandum framed autopen signing as a possible threat to the rule of law if presidential authority was exercised without true presidential oversight. Agencies were instructed to produce records showing whether each item bore clear evidence of the president’s authorization and whether internal agreements concealed relevant video or evidence of the president’s condition. See the White House memorandum for details.
Core claims and allegations
Republican investigators contend autopen use increased in the latter half of Biden’s term as aides purportedly sought to conceal cognitive decline. The oversight report asserts gaps in documentation for decision binders and flags irregularities in pardons and commutations, suggesting some acts may lack clear presidential authorization. The committee’s staff report, “The Biden Autopen Presidency”, details these findings.
“Aides abused the power of Presidential signatures through the use of an autopen to conceal Biden’s cognitive decline and assert Article II authority,” the memorandum states.
The report and memorandum name senior White House staff under scrutiny; some witnesses invoked the Fifth Amendment during interviews. Committee staff have referred certain matters to the Department of Justice for further review.
Legal and constitutional issues raised
Central questions include whether an autopen can validly exercise Article II powers and what documentation and delegation are required. Critics argue that unrecorded autopen signatures without documented authorization could constitute a constitutional violation or, if witnesses lie about their roles, criminal conduct. Supporters point to historical and limited lawful autopen use when properly authorized, but investigators emphasize the alleged scale and secrecy here distinguish the case. Refer to the White House memorandum and the Oversight Committee report for source material.
Perjury risks: The memorandum specifically asked agencies to search for evidence of coordinated false statements or doctored videos and to identify instances of false testimony that could amount to perjury — signaling potential criminal referrals if witnesses misrepresent who authorized autopen use.
Oversight committee actions and referrals
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee released a staff report and has transmitted referrals and document requests to the Department of Justice. Chairman James Comer and staff cited deficiencies in record-keeping and potential efforts to mislead the public about who made final decisions; several aides were singled out for additional review.
Supporters of the probe argue it’s necessary to protect the presidency and public trust, while critics caution that politicizing routine administrative practices could unsettle future administrations unless clear standards are established.
Implications for the Inland Empire, California
Economic impact: Federal reviews that reopen pardons, clemencies or agency actions tied to autopen signatures could affect contracts, labor rules, immigration-related measures and permits — potentially disrupting warehouses, logistics firms and cross-border workers in Riverside and San Bernardino counties.
Political and social effects: The controversy may shape local political conversations ahead of the 2026 midterms, influence voter concerns about transparency and elder-care policies, and prompt public debate about how government documents are authenticated and preserved.
Practical advice: Residents and businesses dependent on federal decisions — including immigration cases, federal grants or contracts — should monitor agency guidance and seek legal counsel if administrative actions are delayed or altered due to the review. See the Oversight Committee report for specifics.
Reporting and next steps
Agencies were ordered to identify affected items and produce evidence of authorization. Lawmakers and officials are expected to produce lists and records that may clarify whether autopen use was routine, authorized, or improperly concealed. The Oversight Committee’s referrals to the DOJ set the stage for additional document requests, interviews and potential legal action.
