Ever wonder if a machine could run the country better than a struggling president? Senator Eric Schmitt, a staunch Republican and chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, is diving deep into former President Joe Biden’s use of an autopen, raising sharp questions about mental capacity and constitutional duty during the twilight of Biden’s term.
As reported by Fox News, this story boils down to Schmitt’s push for access to Biden-era documents to scrutinize autopen usage and determine if legislative fixes are needed to handle a president unable to fully govern.
Schmitt, wielding the Presidential Records Act like a conservative sword, has formally requested memos, emails, and records detailing who had the power to use Biden’s autopen and how those decisions unfolded.
He’s not stopping at signatures—Schmitt also wants White House records post-November 1, 2024, including pardon-related briefing books and decision memos, to paint a full picture of late-term governance.
In a letter exclusively obtained by Fox News, Schmitt pressed Secretary of State and Acting National Archivist Marco Rubio for these documents, setting a firm deadline of July 16, 2025, for access.
The senator’s concern isn’t just bureaucratic nitpicking; it stems from a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on June 17, 2025, where Biden’s alleged mental decline and reliance on an autopen became a glaring symbol of potential incapacity.
Schmitt minced no words, stating, “It is important for this subcommittee to have a clear picture of President Biden’s decision-making capacity at the end of his presidency.” Let’s be real—when a president’s signature comes from a machine, it’s fair to wonder who’s calling the shots.
He added that the “increased use of the autopen” symbolized Biden’s decline, casting doubt on the legitimacy of orders and pardons. If a president isn’t directing that pen, are we witnessing a shadow government in progressive disguise?
Schmitt’s goal is clear: arm the subcommittee with data to craft remedies—be it hearings, new laws, or even constitutional tweaks—to address a mentally unfit leader before the republic stumbles.
Adding fuel to this fire, a closed-door House Oversight Committee hearing with Neera Tanden, former director of Biden’s Domestic Policy Council, stretched over five hours, dissecting her role in autopen processes.
Tanden claimed, “We had a system for authorizing the use of the autopen that I inherited from prior Administrations.” Fine, but inherited or not, shouldn’t someone ensure the president’s hand—or at least his mind—is guiding that system?
She further insisted, “I had no experience in the White House that would provide any reason to question his command as President.” Yet her testimony revealed she sent memos to Biden’s inner circle for autopen approvals, clueless about what happened in between—hardly a ringing endorsement of transparency.
Tanden’s earlier role as staff secretary distanced her from direct interaction with Biden, and even after moving up to Domestic Policy Council director, she washed her hands of autopen decisions. That’s a lot of passing the buck for someone so close to power.
Schmitt’s broader point cuts deeper—without a clear paper trail, how can Congress prevent a future president’s inner circle from quietly usurping authority via mechanical signatures?
This isn’t just about Biden; it’s about safeguarding the Constitution from progressive overreach or any unchecked power grab, regardless of party.
