I'm not going to go too deep into this, but I think that the pardon reversal story does have one interesting aspect.
From the founding of our republic up until fairly recently, the notion that a president would not sign official documents in person seems to have not even been considered. Only recently with the advent of technology is this auto signing even an option. (as opposed to electronic remote signatures) When you add to this the rumors of mental decline of both Reagan and Biden, the possibility of misuse becomes more of a concern.
So while, I generally consider the pardon power absolute, I would also agree that if someone slipped an extra pardon or two into a stack for auto signatures that those pardons would not be valid as POTUS was unaware of them. Obviously this extends to anything that needs a presidential signature being misused.
Where I see the value in Trump's action is that this is clearly something that needs to be litigated to determine when, if ever, an actual signature is required. I think I can make peace with whatever the outcome is, but it needs to be dealt with. If I was Trump, I would promulgate an EO regarding the appropriate use of the auto pen and under what circumstances it will be used. It does seem like there should be limits on it's use, and sooner rather than later.
4 comments:
I agree (except for the part about Reagan's decline, which I don't think was manifesting while he was president---not so with Biden, who to many, myself included, was certain of his decline before he was inaugurated). In the case of Biden, it goes beyond the auto pen because his mental decline was so obvious. To me, it wouldn't matter if he signed it personally in the normal manner or in any other. I have no doubt he was unaware of the vast majority of the pardons and if he physically signed any of them at all for anyone not named "Hunter Biden", they are all null and void simply because he was senile the whole time. He was judged in a court of law to be a doddering old codger who didn't know what he was doing, so that he shouldn't be indicted for his crimes, so how could he have even been encouraged to pardon anyone?
Worse than the use of an auto pen is the use of a senile president to get what one wants. THAT should be investigated and then a ruling on the pardons coming later.
There absolutely needs to be a firm and unambiguous protocol for presidential signatures and the use of auto pens.
My point in referring to Reagan was simply to acknowledge that there have been other presidents besides Biden who've been mentioned as having declining mental abilities in office. Hence, this is not a partisan issue.
The "senile president" issue is way beyond the scope of this post, and not something I have any real desire to explore. Obviously a president with significant mental impairment poses a threat to the country (in several ways) and it's probably worth having that discussion of we're going to keep electing 80 year olds.
I agree that the auto pen thing needs to be limited and part of that will be through litigation.
My personal thought is that Trump should sign an EO that delineates what documents must be signed live, and what could be signed via auto pen (the Thanksgiving proclamation). The problem with an EO is that it isn't binding on future presidents, yet I'm not sure if congress or the courts could impose those limits. I guess that you'd hope that anyone who rescinded the EO would be questioned as to why they did so and treated with suspicion.
They're still saying Trump's cognition is in decline. They weren't anymore truthful in their concerns then than they are now. It was then, as it is now, just another attempt to minimize Reagan in the esteem of Americans. Biden's a whole 'nuther animal and there was quite enough evidence of decline while he was campaigning to be the puppet in 2020. With that, I'll leave the issue aside.
I think the auto pen issue should be that it be disallowed. It's bad enough wondering if the president actually knew what he was signing, much less whether or not he signed it at all.
I'm not sure how this is relevant to the larger point. The reality is that, as long as we continue to elect old people, the potential for cognitive decline exists. This possibility is not limited to DFL presidents, and Trump is not immune. Regardless, it's not and never was relevant other than as an example.
The use of the auto pen without the president's full and complete knowledge and active approval/participation should be restricted. I agree that it should only be used under very limited circumstances, if at all. I'd actually be more comfortable with something like DocuSign, as long as they increased the security protocols to make sure that POTUS was the only one who could acces it.
Post a Comment