Search for posts, channels, users, hashtags & more

President Donald Trump terminates 90% of Joe Biden's autopen executive orders

X Post

Michael Carbonara

🚨 WOW: Biden's autopen has now resulted in upwards of 90% of his approvals being TERMINATED.

NOBODY gets to cheat and get away with it in this country. You'll eventually be found out.

FANTASTIC work by the Trump Administration to uncover this mess. Show up on August 18th to ENSURE that FRAUD like this has NO place in Florida.

Grok Summary

It's fully legal for one president to revoke or terminate a previous president's executive orders (EOs) via their own EOs. This is a routine, well-established power under U.S. law and practice.

Core Legal Principles

  • Executive orders are presidential directives to the executive branch. They have the force of law if grounded in the Constitution or statutes but are not statutes passed by Congress. They can be modified, revoked, or replaced by the issuing president or a successor.
  • Successor presidents routinely do this, especially across party lines (e.g., Biden revoked many of Trump's; Trump has revoked many of Biden's). This is often called the "pendulum effect" and happens early in new administrations.
  • No special court approval is needed for revocation. A new EO simply declares prior ones revoked. Courts can review the new EO's legality if challenged (e.g., if it exceeds authority or violates statutes/Constitution), but the act of revocation itself is standard.

Examples include:

  • Biden's early 2021 actions revoking Trump EOs on regulatory practice.
  • Trump's 2025 actions (e.g., EO 14148) rescinding dozens of Biden EOs in one go.

This power is limited: EOs can't override statutes or the Constitution, and Congress can respond with legislation (subject to veto).

Interaction with "Courts Refusing Criminal Charges Against Biden"

This doesn't meaningfully change the analysis:

  • Criminal charges against a former president/administration are separate from civil/administrative validity of EOs. Even if DOJ or courts declined prosecutions (e.g., for alleged incapacity, fraud, or misuse of autopen), it wouldn't prevent a successor from revoking policy via EO.
  • Revocation is an executive policy tool, not a criminal remedy. Lack of criminal accountability for Biden-era actions (on whatever grounds) doesn't "lock in" those EOs — they remain revocable.
  • If specific Biden actions involved clear illegality (beyond signature method), they could face separate judicial review, but that's case-by-case and not altered by autopen claims.
  • Courts have been reluctant to deeply probe presidential capacity or internal signing processes in ways that would unwind broad swaths of government action. Stability in governance favors treating official acts as presumptively valid unless clearly proven otherwise.

In short: Presidents have broad latitude to reverse predecessors' EOs. The autopen angle adds political drama but doesn't create special legal vulnerabilities or powers here.

This is normal executive branch turnover — not a constitutional crisis or unique "gotcha." If specific EOs are challenged in court, outcomes depend on their statutory/constitutional basis, not the prior president's signature method.