Controversy Arises as Trump Blasts Biden’s Pardons Linked to January 6 Events

Man speaking at podium outdoors gesturing with hand

President Trump has declared that Biden’s last-minute pardons for January 6 Committee members are void, claiming they were signed by autopen without the outgoing president’s knowledge or consent.

Key Takeaways

Trump asserts Biden’s pardons for January 6 Committee members are “void, vacant, and of no further force or effect” because they were allegedly signed using an autopen.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has questioned the legality of the pardons and called for a DOJ investigation into Biden’s cognitive state.
Trump claims Biden “knew nothing” about the pardons due to mental decline, suggesting those who facilitated them may have committed crimes.
The dispute over the validity of autopen-signed pardons will likely require court intervention to resolve.
Biden’s preemptive pardons covered January 6 Committee members, his family, Anthony Fauci, and Gen. Mark Milley.

Trump Declares Biden’s Pardons Invalid

President Donald Trump has taken aim at former President Biden’s final acts in office, specifically targeting pardons issued for members of the January 6 Committee and other political figures. In a strongly-worded post on his Truth Social platform, Trump declared these pardons to be completely invalid. The crux of Trump’s argument centers on his claim that Biden did not personally sign the pardons but instead had them executed via an autopen device, which mechanically reproduces signatures. According to Trump, this method renders the pardons illegitimate, especially if Biden was unaware of their content or issuance.

Legal Questions Surrounding Autopen Pardons

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has added his voice to those questioning the legality of Biden’s pardons. Bailey has suggested that the use of an autopen for presidential pardons may be unconstitutional and has called for a Department of Justice investigation. The legal debate hinges on whether a mechanically reproduced signature carries the same weight as one personally applied by the president. Previous federal court rulings have established that presidential pardons do not necessarily need to be in writing, potentially complicating any legal challenge to the autopen signatures.

HOLY MACRO!!

President Trump declares Biden’s Pardons “VOID, VACANT, AND OF NO FURTHER FORCE OR EFFECT.” pic.twitter.com/gA7J7oXrGS

— I Meme Therefore I Am 🇺🇸 (@ImMeme0) March 17, 2025

Trump himself acknowledged aboard Air Force One that the ultimate decision on the validity of Biden’s pardons would rest with the courts. This recognition suggests that despite his forceful declarations, Trump understands that presidential authority alone cannot vacate pardons issued by a predecessor. The Oversight Project, a right-leaning think tank, has backed Trump’s position, arguing that the use of the autopen without the president’s direct involvement violates constitutional requirements for the exercise of pardon power.

Biden’s Preemptive Pardons and Their Implications

The pardons in question were issued in the final days of Biden’s presidency and preemptively covered several individuals who might have faced legal scrutiny under the Trump administration. Among those reportedly receiving pardons were members of the House panel that investigated the January 6 Capitol riot, Biden family members, Dr. Anthony Fauci, and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley. These actions represented an unusual step to shield political allies from potential prosecution.

Trump has further complicated the situation by accusing the January 6 Committee of destroying evidence, though he has not provided specific proof to support this claim. Critics of Trump’s position warn that establishing a precedent where one administration can void the pardons of a previous one could fundamentally alter the constitutional balance of powers. Since returning to office, Trump has reportedly issued over 1,500 pardons and commutations related to the January 6 attack, highlighting the ongoing political divisions surrounding that event and its aftermath.