So lots of talk last few days after the Heritage foundation discovered that the only document Biden signed as president was the one where he quit the race.
Every single other bill and executive order was signed with an auto pen.
As folks are saying, whoever controlled the auto pen controlled the presidency And people are coming forward to say that Biden didn’t remember signing things even days after they were signed.
So the chatter is all about whether auto pen signing of bills is actually legal. Or whether Biden‘s entire history of executive orders and signing legislation is vacated.
I suspect it’s a Supreme Court question. Or is it? What’s the precedent? What’s the law? If it says the president has to sign bills for them to become law. If the president doesn’t sign it then how can an order or piece of legislation be valid?
Somehow, I think overturning an entire presidency might get a little bit weird constitutionally. Then again that’s what the constitution is for!!
Does an auto pen controlled by someone who is not the president suffice for executive orders, pardons and Bills?
Is there a precedent? For example, when Woodrow Wilson was president following his stroke, his wife pretty much ran the presidency. Does that constitute a precedent that would allow Jill or some staffer to use the auto pen?
Love to know what our legal minds think!!
Sirhr
Every single other bill and executive order was signed with an auto pen.
As folks are saying, whoever controlled the auto pen controlled the presidency And people are coming forward to say that Biden didn’t remember signing things even days after they were signed.
So the chatter is all about whether auto pen signing of bills is actually legal. Or whether Biden‘s entire history of executive orders and signing legislation is vacated.
I suspect it’s a Supreme Court question. Or is it? What’s the precedent? What’s the law? If it says the president has to sign bills for them to become law. If the president doesn’t sign it then how can an order or piece of legislation be valid?
Somehow, I think overturning an entire presidency might get a little bit weird constitutionally. Then again that’s what the constitution is for!!
Does an auto pen controlled by someone who is not the president suffice for executive orders, pardons and Bills?
Is there a precedent? For example, when Woodrow Wilson was president following his stroke, his wife pretty much ran the presidency. Does that constitute a precedent that would allow Jill or some staffer to use the auto pen?
Love to know what our legal minds think!!
Sirhr
Last edited: