A Republican-led House investigation has concluded that top Biden administration officials misused executive authority and took actions without then-President Joe Biden’s direct authorization during the later years of his presidency, as his mental acuity deteriorated.
According to a 91-page report released Tuesday by the House Oversight Committee, Biden’s inner circle concealed the extent of his decline and allowed staff to exercise executive powers that may not have been personally approved by the president. The document brands the administration the “Biden Autopen Presidency” and accuses senior aides of abusing a “lax chain of command” and relying on the presidential autopen to execute official acts.
“The Biden Autopen Presidency ranks among the greatest scandals in U.S. history,” the report declares. “As President Biden declined, his staff abused the autopen and a lax chain-of-command policy to effect executive actions that lack any documentation of whether they were in fact authorized.”
The report alleges a coordinated effort within the White House to shield Biden’s cognitive decline from public view through tightly controlled appearances, scripted messaging, and restricted press access. Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) said the findings reveal “extraordinary measures taken to sustain the appearance of presidential authority as Biden’s capacity to function independently diminished.”
Democrats on the committee immediately denounced the findings as “deeply partisan” and unsupported by definitive evidence. White House allies called the investigation “a political stunt designed to rewrite history.”
Controlled Access and Concealment of Decline
According to the Oversight report, President Biden’s public schedule and media interactions were increasingly managed by a small circle of senior aides. The document claims that the president’s advisers sought to “stage-manage” nearly all of his public appearances, limit off-the-cuff remarks, and prevent unfiltered encounters with reporters.
Internal communications reviewed by investigators allegedly described the president’s schedule as “curated minute-by-minute” to avoid moments of visible confusion or fatigue. The report accuses aides of routinely scripting brief remarks and providing “detailed cue cards” to keep events running smoothly.
Concerns about Biden’s mental sharpness had circulated throughout Washington for years, but they intensified after his disastrous June 2024 presidential debate against Donald Trump. At the time, Biden’s team attributed his halting performance to a “bad cold.” The new report claims that explanation was “misleading” and part of a broader pattern of concealment.
Autopen Use and Questionable Executive Actions
A central claim of the Oversight Committee’s report involves the presidential autopen — a mechanical device that replicates the president’s signature on official documents. While the autopen has been used lawfully by past presidents to sign legislation or correspondence when traveling, the committee contends Biden’s aides used it without ensuring his personal authorization.
Investigators found that multiple executive orders, proclamations, and clemency grants were signed using the autopen with no accompanying documentation showing Biden reviewed or approved them. The committee cited missing or incomplete “decision memos” — internal documents meant to record presidential approval — for actions taken during the final year of his term.
One internal memo reportedly stated that the president’s “decision binder,” containing memos awaiting signature, was sometimes handled by staff without formal chain-of-custody records. The committee says this lapse left open the possibility that aides could direct executive actions themselves.
“There is no consistent record demonstrating that President Biden personally approved every executive action attributed to him,” the report states. “Several actions were initiated through staff correspondence, verbal direction, or implied consent, with no written evidence of the president’s authorization.”
Pardons and Clemency Under Scrutiny
The committee’s most serious accusations center on presidential pardons and clemency decisions made during Biden’s final months in office. Investigators claim that some pardons — including commutations for violent offenders and end-of-term pardons for members of Biden’s family — were issued without signed decision memos or documented in-person meetings.
Internal Justice Department emails cited in the report describe ethics attorneys expressing concern that the White House “bypassed review protocols” and that Biden may not have been aware of the full criminal histories of certain recipients. The report states that the administration did not consult victims’ families in clemency cases, a step past presidents often took.
In the most controversial episode, the committee says then-Chief of Staff Jeff Zients verbally authorized use of the autopen to sign family pardons after an aide emailed approval on his behalf. Zients, according to testimony, “did not know who physically operated the autopen and did not confirm with President Biden that he approved the pardons.”
That incident, the report says, “calls into question the validity of all pardons reportedly granted by President Biden throughout his tenure.” The committee argues that any action executed by autopen without traceable presidential consent should be considered void.
Interviews, Testimony, and Fifth Amendment Invocations
The committee’s findings are based on 14 interviews with current and former senior officials, including ex-Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and former Chiefs of Staff Ron Klain and Jeff Zients. Other witnesses, such as close Biden aides Anita Dunn, Annie Tomasini, and Anthony Bernal, were also questioned.
Dr. Kevin O’Connor, the president’s longtime physician, declined to testify, invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. O’Connor’s absence drew special criticism in the report, which accuses him of issuing “grossly misleading” health assessments and refusing to administer a formal cognitive exam despite internal recommendations.
“Dr. O’Connor’s evaluations were politically influenced and medically incomplete,” the report claims. “He withheld information from the public that was material to understanding the president’s ability to execute his duties.”
Both Tomasini and Bernal, two of Biden’s most trusted aides, also invoked the Fifth Amendment, leading Chairman Comer to refer their cases to the Department of Justice for potential investigation. Comer further requested that the D.C. Board of Medicine review O’Connor’s professional conduct for possible malpractice.
Democratic Response: ‘A Baseless Political Attack’
Democrats on the committee rejected the findings outright, characterizing the investigation as an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the previous administration. Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) said the report “relies on speculation, innuendo, and partisan talking points rather than verified evidence.”
“Every White House official testified that President Biden was actively engaged in decision-making and fully performed his duties,” Raskin said. “This so-called ‘autopen scandal’ is a manufactured distraction.”
Former Biden aides have insisted that all executive actions were properly authorized and that autopen usage followed standard legal procedures. They note that presidents going back to Dwight Eisenhower have used the autopen to execute documents when unavailable to sign them personally.
Constitutional scholars also caution that the Oversight Committee’s proposal to void executive actions signed by autopen would raise serious legal issues. The Constitution grants the president broad discretion to delegate administrative tasks, and courts have never ruled that autopen use — even if poorly documented — invalidates official acts.
Medical and Ethical Questions
Beyond the procedural concerns, the report paints a troubling picture of the president’s health management during his final years in office. It suggests that senior aides and family members worked to downplay his cognitive struggles, discouraging staff from acknowledging visible lapses.
The committee claims that medical assessments were influenced by political advisers such as Anita Dunn and that decisions about whether to release detailed medical information were based on “optics” rather than transparency.
The White House physician’s office, in statements at the time, maintained that Biden was “fit to successfully execute the duties of the presidency.” But the new report argues that those assessments lacked the objective medical testing — including cognitive evaluations — that independent doctors would typically require for a patient of the president’s age.
Connection to Earlier Reports and Books
The Oversight Committee’s conclusions echo themes raised earlier in the year in “Original Sin,” a bestselling book by CNN anchor Jake Tapper and Axios reporter Alex Thompson. That book detailed internal tensions over Biden’s capacity and described aides privately expressing concern about his decision-making.
Similarly, former Special Counsel Robert Hur’s February 2024 report on Biden’s handling of classified documents noted that the president’s memory had “significant limitations,” though Hur stopped short of suggesting incapacitation. At the time, the White House reportedly pressed Hur to soften his language — an allegation the administration denied.
Republicans argue that these independent accounts, combined with the new congressional findings, demonstrate a long-term pattern of concealment about Biden’s mental state.
Potential Legal and Political Fallout
Chairman Comer has formally referred parts of the Oversight findings to the Justice Department, urging a review of all executive actions taken during Biden’s presidency. He also asked Attorney General Pam Bondi, appointed under the current administration, to investigate the aides who declined to testify.
Legal experts say it remains unclear whether such referrals will lead to criminal inquiries. Proving that aides intentionally misused executive authority or forged authorization would require direct evidence that they knew the president had not approved a given action.
Still, the political ramifications are significant. The report revives debate over presidential fitness, transparency, and the limits of staff authority — issues that dominated headlines after Biden’s 2024 debate collapse and his subsequent withdrawal from the presidential race.
After dropping out, Biden endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris, who went on to lose the 2024 election to Donald Trump. Republicans later regained control of both chambers of Congress, paving the way for the current investigation.
A President in Decline, a System Under Strain
The report portrays a presidency that, by its final months, was effectively being run by an inner circle of advisers rather than by Biden himself. It argues that the constitutional chain of command broke down as aides blurred the line between administrative facilitation and decision-making authority.
If true, the implications are historic. “We cannot have a system where unelected aides wield presidential authority in the shadows,” Comer said. “This was a breakdown of constitutional responsibility and an affront to the American people.”
Yet even among some Republicans, questions linger about what practical remedies exist. Short of definitive proof that Biden was incapacitated or that aides forged his approval, courts are unlikely to invalidate past executive actions. Legal scholars note that executive decisions, once published and acted upon, carry strong presumptions of validity.
What Happens Next
The Justice Department has not announced whether it will pursue further investigation. A senior DOJ official told reporters that the department is “reviewing the committee’s materials” but declined further comment.
Meanwhile, Biden — now 82 and battling an aggressive form of prostate cancer — has remained largely out of public view since leaving office. Friends describe him as “focused on family and health” and disengaged from the political storm surrounding his legacy.
