The Department of Justice has launched a formal investigation into the alleged misuse of an autopen device for issuing presidential pardons during the final days of the previous administration. The inquiry, which has been quietly progressing for several weeks, is being led by Ed Martin—recently appointed as the DOJ’s pardon attorney and head of its newly formed Weaponization Working Group. Martin confirmed that the investigation began during his prior role as interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and has since gathered significant momentum.
According to Martin, the investigation was triggered by a whistleblower—someone with close connections to senior Democratic leadership—who raised serious concerns about how the autopen process was being used. The whistleblower claimed that access to the device was tightly controlled and may have been leveraged for personal or political gain.
“I had a whistleblower in my office just ten days ago,” Martin revealed in an interview on 2WAY Tonight. “They suggested there may have been deliberate efforts to manipulate or obscure the presidential pardon process, especially in the days leading up to the transition of power. We’re examining everything very carefully.”
Several former senior White House officials are reportedly under review as part of the investigation. Among those named are Ron Klain, former Chief of Staff; Anita Dunn, a longtime senior advisor to President Biden; Robert Bauer, former legal counsel under President Obama; Steve Ricchetti, Biden’s former counselor and campaign chairman; and even First Lady Jill Biden. However, Martin emphasized that the focus is on procedural integrity, and no conclusions about individual misconduct have been drawn at this time.
The controversy centers on the use of the autopen—a device capable of replicating a person’s signature on official documents. Its use in government is legal under certain circumstances, especially when physical presence is impossible. However, questions have emerged about whether pardons and other executive actions were authorized appropriately, particularly when documents bearing presidential signatures were issued while the president was reported to be away from the White House or uninvolved in the decisions.
Concerns have also grown over whether aides or staff may have used the autopen to sign off on actions without formal delegation or documentation, raising the stakes for the investigation. Some critics argue that such practices, if confirmed, could undermine public trust in the legitimacy of presidential authority.
Congress is also stepping in. Members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee have called for testimony from medical and administrative personnel tied to the previous administration to determine if any lapses in presidential fitness or delegation of authority may have occurred without proper protocols. Committee Chairman James Comer stressed that the committee’s goal is to ensure transparency and accountability across all branches of government. He also noted that new legislation could be introduced to strengthen oversight on executive decision-making and signature authorization processes.
As the DOJ moves forward, officials stress that the investigation’s primary aim is to uphold the rule of law and preserve the integrity of the pardon system. While still in its early stages, the inquiry has already sparked serious discussion in Washington about the role of technology in executive authority and the need for stronger safeguards around presidential actions.
Whether this investigation results in legal consequences or policy reforms, it is already reshaping the conversation around executive power, accountability, and the tools used behind the scenes at the highest levels of government.