Fact-Check Summary
The claim that all documents, including pardons and executive orders, signed by President Biden using an autopen are now null and void, is false. U.S. law and constitutional precedent confirm that presidential pardons are final and irreversible by successor presidents. The use of autopen has been recognized as legally valid by the Department of Justice and does not invalidate executive orders or pardons. There is no legal basis for President Trump—or any former president—to void a predecessor’s signed documents by declaration.
Belief Alignment Analysis
This post undermines respect for constitutional processes and democratic norms by spreading a false narrative that one president can unilaterally void the legitimate executive actions of another without due process. The inflammatory language (“infamous and unauthorized AUTOPEN”) is misleading and builds distrust in institutions. Rather than fostering civil, inclusive discourse, it promotes division and confusion regarding lawful presidential authority.
Opinion
The post uses hyperbolic and legally inaccurate assertions to attack the legitimacy of a political opponent, disregarding both legal precedent and constructive democratic engagement. Criticism of the autopen process is valid as part of public debate; however, baselessly declaring all such documents null misinforms the public and erodes confidence in the rule of law.
TLDR
Trump’s claim that all of Biden’s autopen-signed documents are “null and void” is false. Presidential pardons and executive orders, even when signed by autopen, remain legally in effect unless overturned through proper constitutional or legislative means.
Claim: All documents, including pardons and executive orders, signed by President Biden using an autopen are now null, void, and of no effect because Trump has declared them so.
Fact: There is no legal mechanism for a president to retroactively revoke documents or pardons of a predecessor, regardless of signing method. Presidential pardons are constitutionally final, and the use of autopen has been found legally valid by the Department of Justice and federal courts.
Opinion: The claim is both unsupported and dangerously misleading, undermining public trust in lawful governance and democratic procedures.
TruthScore: 0
True: The House Oversight Committee has investigated autopen use and there is legitimate debate about its frequency and transparency.
Hyperbole: “Infamous and unauthorized AUTOPEN,” the sweeping assertion that all documents are “null and void,” and language implying immediate termination of legal effects without process.
Lies: That Trump or any former president can unilaterally declare their successor’s signed documents null via order or proclamation, and that autopen use alone voids legally binding documents.