Forget the Autopen. The Question Is Forgery.

 Autopen Debate

- Discussions about using the autopen to sign President Biden’s name on official documents often miss the main point: Is it a forgery?

Presidential Signature and Authority

- Many presidential actions require a signed document to be effective.

- The 2005 Department of Justice opinion states the president does not need to sign personally; delegating the signing is allowed.

- The signature serves as evidence that the president exercised power, but it's not the act itself.

Key Questions Regarding Presidential Action

- The crucial question is not about the signature method but whether the president authorized the signing of the document.

- Exclusively presidential powers, like pardon authority, must be exercised by the president.

Forgery Definition and Implications

- Forgery involves creating or altering documents to deceive or defraud.

- The key issue is whether the White House used the autopen to forge President Biden’s signature.

Legal Context of Forgery

- There is no federal criminal forgery statute, but creating false statements in government records is a crime under 18 U. S. C. sec. 1001.

- Actions taken without the president's knowledge are invalid, as they are not true presidential actions.

Conclusion on Autopen Use

- The debate on autopen obscures the simpler issue: Is the signature genuine or forged?

- If the president did not authorize a pardon, it is invalid regardless of the document bearing the autopen signature.

- The focus should remain on whether proper presidential authority was exercised or if illegal actions occurred by others.

https://spectator.org/forget-the-autopen-the-question-is-forgery/