In an interview Friday on Just the News, No Noise, Comer said evidence uncovered by his panel raises serious questions about whether Biden was mentally aware of what he was authorizing during his final months as president. If proven, Comer argues, that evidence could potentially be used to challenge — and even overturn — some of Biden’s pardons and executive orders.
At the center of the controversy is Biden’s heavy reliance on the autopen, a mechanical device used to replicate a president’s signature.
“Did He Even Know What He Was Signing?”
Comer did not mince words when discussing the legal stakes.
“It’s questionable whether or not it’s legal to use an autopen on a legal document,” Comer said. “But what’s not questionable is if the President of the United States had no idea what was being signed using the autopen in his name. Then, you know, that’s not legal. We could see criminal charges against some.”
The Kentucky Republican emphasized that the issue is not merely procedural but constitutional. While past administrations have used autopens under limited circumstances, Comer suggested Biden’s situation was fundamentally different — not a matter of convenience, but of capacity.
According to Comer, the Oversight Committee has gathered testimony and documentation suggesting senior White House staff may have exercised authority that constitutionally belongs to the president alone.
The Debate That Changed Everything
Comer pointed to Biden’s disastrous debate performance in the summer of 2024 as a turning point.
That appearance — which saw Biden struggle to complete sentences, lose his train of thought, and appear visibly confused — ignited bipartisan concerns about his cognitive condition. Within weeks, Biden withdrew from the presidential race and endorsed then–Vice President Kamala Harris.
“That debate gave rise to very serious questions about his mental capacity,” Comer said.
The chairman suggested that actions taken after that debate deserve heightened scrutiny, particularly those involving sweeping executive authority or irreversible decisions like pardons and clemency.
Pardons, Executive Orders, and Constitutional Authority
One of the most explosive elements of Comer’s comments is his assertion that the committee’s findings could be used in court.
“I think at the end of the day, our investigation could be used as evidence in trying to overturn some of those pardons and some of the executive orders,” Comer said, citing the frequency with which the autopen was used in Biden’s final months.
That claim has drawn attention from legal scholars — including Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz, who acknowledged earlier this year that such challenges would likely end up before the courts.
Dershowitz explained that any legal challenge would hinge on two central questions:
What was signed — for example, a pardon versus legislation passed by Congress
How it was signed — and whether the Constitution allows delegation of that act under the circumstances
The Autopen Problem
Dershowitz noted that the Constitution is explicit in certain contexts.
“The Constitution states of bills: ‘If he approves, he shall sign it.’ It says, ‘sign it.’ Sign it,” Dershowitz said. “An autopen would raise a real problem if he signed it by machine.”
While presidents have historically used autopens for routine matters when fully aware and directing the action, legal experts say the practice becomes constitutionally suspect if the president lacks awareness or capacity.
That distinction — awareness versus delegation — is what makes Comer’s investigation potentially significant.
Who Was Really Running the White House?
Underlying the legal debate is a far more troubling political question: Who was exercising executive power in Biden’s final months?
Comer has repeatedly suggested that unelected aides may have effectively governed in Biden’s name, using the autopen to push through decisions without meaningful presidential input.
If proven, such actions could expose staffers to legal liability and trigger unprecedented judicial scrutiny of executive authority.
“If the president didn’t know what was being signed, then someone else was making those decisions,” Comer said. “And that’s a constitutional crisis.”
What Happens Next
Comer has not yet specified which pardons or executive orders might be targeted, nor has he announced formal legal action. But he made clear that the Oversight Committee is continuing to gather evidence and interview witnesses.
Legal experts caution that overturning a presidential pardon would be extraordinary and face significant hurdles. Still, even the possibility of litigation would mark a historic challenge to executive power — and to the Biden presidency’s legacy.
For now, Comer’s comments ensure one thing: the debate over Biden’s mental fitness did not end when he left office.
It may only be beginning.