Dershowitz says challenges to Biden's autopen for bills, pardons 'will end up in court'

Harvard Law School Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz said Monday that challenges to former President Joe Biden's autopen for bills and pardons "will end up in court."

Dershowitz explained on the "John Solomon Reports" podcast on Monday that there are a couple of problems with the autopen that could arise in court.

"They will end up in court, and there are going to be two issues. One, the nature of what was signed — was it a pardon, or was it a bill from Congress, for example. And second, the nature of the autopen," Dershowitz said.

"First, the nature of what's signed. If it was a bill, here's what the Constitution says: 'If he approves, he shall sign it.' So it says, 'sign it.' Sign it. So an autopen would raise a real problem if he signed it by autopen, which is not a real signature. Pardons, it doesn't say anything about signing it. It says, 'he shall have the power to grant reprieves and pardons.' So I think the people who will try to sustain the pardons would argue, 'look, he can pardon orally,' and therefore it doesn't matter whether he used the pen," he continued.

"But it will still raise the issue, did he actually pardon? Or did somebody else just write the signature without really getting approval from President Biden? You know, we know there were mental health issues there. So there the issue will be, did he approve the pardon? And if he did, probably the nature of the signature won't count."

Dershowitz also discussed the nature of the autopen, contrasting Thomas Jefferson's "autopen" that copied his letters five times as he wrote them to today's digital autopen that anyone with access can click a button and "sign" the president's signature.

If someone used an autopen to sign a pardon that Biden did not want issued, "then they're not valid," Dershowitz said.

"If, on the other hand, the president said, 'Look, I'm pardoning my son — give me something to sign,' and they used an autopen to sign it, I suspect that pardon would be upheld, because the Constitution doesn't require that it be in writing, that it be signed, whereas the bills literally have to be signed," he added.

"For example, if a bill was signed and forged by somebody, the bill would be invalid. And the question is, if a pardon is forged, but the president said, 'you can forge my signature,' you know that would be a different issue. So we don't have enough facts to know whether or not any of the pardons could be challenged effectively.

"The other question is, who would have standing to challenge them? Obviously, the person getting the pardon wouldn't do that. Who would be the person who could challenge the actual pardon? That would be another issue the courts would face," Dershowitz said.

The Oversight Project, an investigative arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, has alleged an excessive use of autopen signature by Biden when he was in the White House.

Following the Oversight Project findings, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey called for the Department of Justice to investigate whether Biden’s "cognitive decline allowed unelected staff to push through radical policy without his knowing approval."

Trump said Monday that Biden's pardons are "void" because they were signed with an autopen.

Among those pardoned by Biden include son Hunter, Dr. Anthony Fauci and members of a select House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

"The 'Pardons' that Sleepy Joe Biden gave to the Unselect Committee of Political Thugs, and many others, are hereby declared VOID, VACANT, AND OF NO FURTHER FORCE OR EFFECT, because of the fact that they were done by Autopen," Trump posted on Truth Social.