Newly released emails from the Department of Justice have shed new light on the scope of the controversy surrounding Joe Biden’s use of the autopen to issue thousands of pardons and commutations during his administration’s final days.
The documents, disclosed by DOJ official Ed Martin, confirm that Biden’s own Justice Department raised concerns that the last-minute autopen pardons were legally flawed, particularly in cases involving violent offenders.
Earlier this year, Martin revealed he was reviewing the autopen scandal, which was first brought to public attention by the Oversight Project.
The group uncovered that thousands of acts of clemency and executive actions had been authorized using the autopen rather than Biden’s personal signature.
Investigators later determined that two different autopen signature patterns—labeled Autopen A and Autopen B—were used to process the pardons and commutations. Both signatures carried slight variations but were not signed directly by Biden.
According to emails reviewed by The New York Times, Biden staffers, including senior aides Neera Tanden, Jeff Zients, and Stephanie Feldman, were involved in carrying out the process.
The records indicate that staffers frequently authorized the autopen to finalize pardons without directly confirming the decisions with Biden.
In some cases, changes were made to the list of inmates receiving clemency, but the revised names were not personally approved by Biden before being run through the autopen.
The Justice Department emails further show that Associate Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer flagged serious issues with the practice.
In a message dated January 18, just two days before Biden left office, Weinsheimer warned administration lawyers that the language used in one sweeping warrant signed with the autopen was “highly problematic.”
He cautioned that the vague wording of the document, which granted clemency to hundreds of inmates, risked making the commutations legally “ineffective.”
More significantly, Weinsheimer noted that the lack of specificity could result in pardons being applied to crimes of violence—including murder—contrary to what Biden had intended.
Weinsheimer also raised objections about the Justice Department being sidelined from the process.
He wrote that DOJ officials had been blocked from vetting clemency candidates and that pardons were granted despite “voluminous objections” from victims’ families.
Among the cases highlighted were pardons for individuals convicted of murdering police officers and children.
The emails suggest Biden aides moved forward with the autopen approvals despite internal warnings that the clemency orders were overly broad and potentially unlawful.
The Washington Times, which reviewed the email chain, reported that DOJ officials believed the autopen pardons undermined legal standards and could leave the government vulnerable to challenges.
The controversy continues to raise questions about oversight, accountability, and the legality of executive actions that were executed in the closing days of Biden’s administration without direct presidential approval.
