 |
|
you didn't read any of that, so we're done here, you're
Posted on: June 21, 2025 at 09:32:24 CT
90Tiger STL
Posts:
162556
Member For:
23.33 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
just repeating yourself from a position of ignorance.
What Is Not Allowed (or Controversial) for Autopen Use
Certain presidential actions involve unique constitutional powers that some argue require the president’s personal involvement, raising questions about whether an autopen is appropriate. Examples include:
Pardons and Clemency: The power to grant pardons is vested solely in the president under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, which states the president “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States.” Because this is a discretionary act tied to the president’s individual judgment, critics contend that using an autopen could undermine its legitimacy if the president didn’t personally review or approve each case. There’s no explicit legal prohibition, but the lack of a personal signature might invite challenges to the intent behind the pardon.
Executive Orders (Without Clear Authorization): Executive orders direct federal agencies and carry the force of law, reflecting the president’s Article II authority to manage the executive branch. While autop signatures have been used for executive orders, some legal scholars argue that if the president is unaware of or uninvolved in the issuance—say, due to cognitive decline or delegation to staff—the order’s validity could be questioned. The Constitution doesn’t mandate a handwritten signature, but the perception of presidential control is key.
Treaty Ratifications: Ratifying treaties under Article II, Section 2 requires the president’s personal engagement after Senate approval. While the physical act of signing might technically be delegated, any suggestion that an autopen was used without the president’s direct knowledge could cast doubt on the process, though this hasn’t been tested in court.
The core issue isn’t the autopen itself but whether the president personally authorized its use and understood the document being signed. Without that, the action’s legitimacy could be contested.
Edited by 90Tiger at 09:32:46 on 06/21/25
What Is Not Allowed (or Controversial) for Autopen Use
Certain presidential actions involve unique constitutional powers that some argue require the president’s personal involvement, raising questions about whether an autopen is appropriate. Examples include:
Pardons and Clemency: The power to grant pardons is vested solely in the president under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, which states the president “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States.” Because this is a discretionary act tied to the president’s individual judgment, critics contend that using an autopen could undermine its legitimacy if the president didn’t personally review or approve each case. There’s no explicit legal prohibition, but the lack of a personal signature might invite challenges to the intent behind the pardon.
Executive Orders (Without Clear Authorization): Executive orders direct federal agencies and carry the force of law, reflecting the president’s Article II authority to manage the executive branch. While autop signatures have been used for executive orders, some legal scholars argue that if the president is unaware of or uninvolved in the issuance—say, due to cognitive decline or delegation to staff—the order’s validity could be questioned. The Constitution doesn’t mandate a handwritten signature, but the perception of presidential control is key.
Treaty Ratifications: Ratifying treaties under Article II, Section 2 requires the president’s personal engagement after Senate approval. While the physical act of signing might technically be delegated, any suggestion that an autopen was used without the president’s direct knowledge could cast doubt on the process, though this hasn’t been tested in court.
The core issue isn’t the autopen itself but whether the president personally authorized its use and understood the document being signed. Without that, the action’s legitimacy could be contested.
Edited by 90Tiger at 09:32:46 on 06/21/25
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
- 
you didn't read any of that, so we're done here, you're - 90Tiger STL - 6/21 09:32:24