Justice Department Unable To Build Criminal Case Over Biden’s Use Of Autopen
The U.S. Justice Department investigated whether former President Joe Biden or his aides broke the law by using an autopen device to sign official presidential documents. After reviewing the matter, prosecutors concluded they could not build a criminal case, according to people familiar with the investigation.
The decision marks another instance in which federal prosecutors have been unable to pursue legal action tied to demands from President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly called for investigations into his political rivals.
Investigation Focused on Biden’s Presidential Pardons
The inquiry centered on Biden’s use of an autopen — a device that automatically reproduces a person’s signature — to sign certain presidential documents, including pardons and commutations issued during the final months of his presidency.
Trump and several conservative media figures had promoted claims that those pardons might be legally invalid. They argued Biden may not have had the mental capacity to personally authorize them and that aides could have used the autopen without proper approval.
However, after reviewing the evidence, prosecutors in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, D.C. were unable to establish that any crime had been committed.
The investigation was ultimately quietly shelved in recent months, according to individuals briefed on the matter.
Trump Allies Led the Inquiry
The investigation was conducted by the Washington U.S. attorney’s office, which is currently led by Jeanine Pirro, a longtime Trump ally.
Earlier stages of the inquiry were initiated under Ed Martin, another Trump loyalist who served as interim U.S. attorney before Pirro took over.
Martin had sought information from several of Biden’s former aides. As part of the investigation, he sent letters requesting details about how the former president made decisions regarding pardons and whether he had personally approved them.
Despite those efforts, prosecutors ultimately concluded that they lacked sufficient evidence to move forward.
A spokesperson for Pirro declined to confirm or deny whether the investigation had taken place, and the Justice Department did not respond to requests for comment.
Biden Rejects Claims About Autopen Use
Biden has strongly denied allegations that the autopen was used improperly.
In an interview with The New York Times last summer, he insisted that he personally authorized every decision related to clemency.
“I made every decision,” Biden said.
He explained that staff members sometimes used the autopen simply to replicate his signature because of the large number of documents that required signing.
“We’re talking about a whole lot of people,” he added.
Legal Questions Complicated the Investigation
The inquiry faced several major legal challenges from the beginning.
Investigators reportedly struggled to identify a specific criminal law that might have been violated by using the autopen. The device has been used by multiple presidents in the past for routine documents.
Another complication involved the Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling granting broad immunity to presidents for official acts performed while in office. That decision raised questions about whether Biden himself could even be targeted by a criminal investigation related to presidential duties.
Prosecutors also debated whether any potential focus should be on Biden personally or on members of his staff who may have handled the signing process.
Ultimately, those legal uncertainties made it difficult for investigators to justify bringing charges.
Part of a Broader Pattern of Unsuccessful Investigations
The autopen case is one of several investigations pushed by Trump or his allies that have failed to produce indictments.
In another recent example, federal prosecutors attempted to charge six Democratic lawmakers who had posted a video reminding members of the military and intelligence agencies that they are obligated to refuse illegal orders.
Trump was reportedly angered by the video, and prosecutors sought to bring charges.
However, a grand jury declined to issue an indictment, an outcome that historically has been extremely rare in federal courts.
Prosecutors Were Skeptical From the Start
According to people familiar with the internal discussions, many veteran prosecutors questioned the legal basis of both investigations from the outset.
They reportedly believed there was insufficient evidence to justify criminal charges.
Despite that skepticism, the cases moved forward for months as pressure from the administration mounted.
The autopen investigation was eventually dropped before prosecutors presented any potential charges to a grand jury.
Trump Pressured Justice Department to Investigate
The inquiry gained momentum last year when Trump publicly called for the Justice Department to examine Biden’s mental acuity and the legality of his use of the autopen.
In June, Trump signed an order directing White House counsel and Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate whether Biden’s aides had used the device illegally.
Trump and his supporters argued that if Biden had been mentally incapable of approving pardons, those decisions could be invalid.
Political Symbolism at the White House
The administration’s criticism of Biden extended beyond legal investigations.
When Trump installed a gallery of portraits of past presidents at the White House, Biden’s place reportedly featured a framed image of an autopen instead of a traditional portrait.
The image was positioned between two photographs of Trump.
Critics viewed the display as a political statement reinforcing the administration’s accusations regarding Biden’s use of the device.
Concerns About Political Use of the Justice System
The failed autopen case has intensified concerns among some federal investigators that the Justice Department is increasingly being asked to pursue politically motivated investigations.
According to people inside the department, prosecutors across the country have been pressured to open inquiries into Trump’s political opponents.
Reactions among prosecutors have varied. Some have moved forward with investigations despite doubts about the evidence, while others have refused to participate or have resigned in protest.
Other Investigations Linked to Trump’s Political Rivals
Several other politically charged investigations have emerged in recent months.
In Minnesota, the Justice Department opened an inquiry into Democratic officials who criticized the administration’s immigration enforcement policies. Investigators suggested their statements could constitute a conspiracy to obstruct federal law enforcement.
That investigation has already produced legal challenges, with several grand jury subpoenas currently being contested in court.
Meanwhile, U.S. prosecutors have also opened a criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, whom Trump has repeatedly criticized and attempted to replace.
In another case, the FBI searched an elections office in the Atlanta area based on Trump’s longstanding claims that the 2020 presidential election had been stolen — allegations that numerous investigations and courts have previously rejected.
Uncertainty Over Future Investigations
It remains unclear whether administration officials might attempt to revive the autopen investigation in the future or push prosecutors to revisit the issue.
For now, however, the case appears to be closed.
The inability to produce charges underscores the ongoing tension between political demands from the White House and the legal standards required for federal prosecutions.
