A new watchdog report has ignited controversy after revealing that President Joe Biden may not have personally approved several key climate-related executive orders, raising questions about the use of an autopen to sign them into law.
The autopen, a device capable of replicating the president’s signature, was reportedly used on multiple executive directives tied to major environmental policy decisions. The findings show no definitive evidence that Biden was directly involved in authorizing those orders.
Energy policy advocates and government watchdogs are now demanding clarity over who made the final call on these sweeping actions, especially given their influence on national energy production and economic regulations.
Critics argue that using a mechanical signature for high-impact policies undermines both transparency and accountability. They insist that Americans deserve to know who is truly behind executive decisions that affect the nation’s direction on climate and energy.
Although the Justice Department has previously deemed autopen use legally acceptable under certain conditions, this case has reignited debate over the limits of such practices when it comes to presidential authority.
Calls for increased oversight and documentation are growing, as lawmakers push for assurance that future executive actions are the result of direct presidential intent—not delegated signatures.