Legal Recourse for Unauthorized Biden Autopen Pardons: Schmitt & Harrison Discuss

Unauthorized Autopen Pardons

• ❓ Senator Schmitt questions Professor Harrison on recourse if a pardon is issued using President Biden's autopen signature without his direct authorization.
• 💡 Professor Harrison identifies two potential issues: whether documents are treated as validly issued even without proper authentication, and if the pardon itself would be challenged as a defense against prosecution.

Validity of Autopen Signatures

• ⚖️ Harrison notes that while rules exist for documents to be treated as validly issued even if not properly authenticated, he would need to inquire if such a rule applies specifically to presidential pardons.
• ⚠️ The primary scenario where a pardon's validity might be questioned is if it's offered as a defense against prosecution, and the government argues the pardon was invalid.

Legislative Branch Remedies

• 🏛️ Professor Harrison suggests it's difficult for Congress to enact remedies ex post facto (after the fact).
• 🛠️ He advises that ex ante (before the fact) improvements to the authentication process would make the system more reliable and clearer that autopen signatures reflect the president's decision.

Transparency and Executive Authentication

• 🧐 Schmitt asks who was running the country under Biden, suggesting a lack of transparency compared to the Trump administration's documented processes for authentication.
• 📄 Harrison indicates that if the Biden administration were to provide documentation showing presidential assent to actions, it would help dispel doubts.
• 📈 He emphasizes the need to improve how executive branch employees authenticate presidential actions if such documentation is lacking.

Media Coverage Comparison

• 🗣️ Sean Spicer contrasts media coverage of Trump's mental acuity, which he claims was often manufactured, with the lack of inquiry into Biden's cognitive state despite visible issues.
• 📰 Spicer states that the media seemed