The AutoPen Saga Involving Joe Biden's Late Flurry of Pardons Is A Legal Dead-End

It is a political scandal that requires robust Congressional Investigation to get to the truth of the abuse of power if that is what happened.

“…he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”

That is the entirety of what the Constitution has to say on the issue of the Presidential pardon power.

But it is in Article II, not Articles I or III.

In this regard, it is no different than Article I’s provision stating “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.”

Nor is it different from Article III’s language that “In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.”

These provisions represent “plenary” authority of the Legislative and Judicial branches respectively — the power is conferred to one branch of the federal government to the exclusion of the other branches of the federal government.

So, what are we to make of the controversy over the signing of Presidential Pardons during the Biden Administration via an “AutoPen” — a computer controlled device that follows the movements with a writing instrument to create an exact duplicate of the image that is inputted to it.

As I’ve noted on X to great consternation, the Constitution is silent as to what form a pardon must take, and whether there is a valid or invalid format for the issuance of a Presidential Pardon.