If a machine can sign for the President, could Sasha, too?
President Barack Obama speaks to reporters as he meets with Japan's Prime Minister Naoto Kan at the G8 summit in Deauville, France, May 26, 2011. / AP Photo/Charles Dharapak
President Barack Obama speaks to reporters as he meets with Japan's Prime Minister Naoto Kan at the G8 summit in Deauville, France, May 26, 2011.
/ AP Photo/Charles Dharapak
Pres. Obama was 3,700 miles from the White House at the G8 Summit in Deauville, France, when Congress voted final passage of a bill to extend the life of three expiring provisions of the Patriot Act, provisions deemed important by the president.
There was no way to get the bill signed by Mr. Obama in France before the Thursday midnight deadline, so aides say he authorized his staff secretary to use the "autopen" to sign the bill for him.
"Failure to sign this legislation poses a significant risk to U.S. national security," said Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest. "Congress approved the extension, and the president directed the use of the autopen to sign it."
The "autopen" is a device used by the White House for decades to sign the million Christmas cards a president sends out each year. It's used by political committees to appeal on the president's name for contributions.
But this is the first time that we know of an "autopen" was used to sign legislation into law. And it raises the question: is it legal?
See what Article 1, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution says:
"Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approves he shall sign it..."
It says "he shall sign it." It doesn't say he can have an aide use a mechanical device to affix a facsimile of his signature to the legislation.
Questioned about the constitutionality of using an autopen to sign a bill for the president, the White House pointed to a 2005 opinion from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. At the end of a 29-page review that includes obscure legal references and frequent citations of common lawn, the OLC came to this opinion:
"...we conclude that the President need not personally perform the physical act of affixing his signature to a bill he approves and decides to sign in order for the bill to become law. Rather, the President may sign a bill within the meaning of Article I, Section 7 by directing a subordinate to affix the President's signature to such a bill, for example by autopen."
And that's what President Obama did.
Spokesman Nick Shapiro says Mr. Obama was awakened at 5:45 a.m. in Deauville, France, by the staff secretary on the trip, to review and approve the Patriot Act bill. With 15 minutes before the deadline, "he then directed that the autopen be used so it could be signed into law."
We're told the aide sent word back to the White House to put President Obama's John Hancock on the bill robotically with the autopen.
A White House staffer says it was first time the autopen has been used by President Obama to sign a bill into law.
Former White House Chief of Staff Andy Card tells CBS News that President George W. Bush never used the autopen to sign a bill, even though the legal opinion validating such a practice was produced during his administration.
The Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of using an "autopen" to sign a bill into law.
And if the president can authorize a machine be used to enact legislation, could he ask one of his daughters to sign his name to a new law?
When one member of Congress first heard that an autopen had been used to enact legislation, he first thought it was a joke.
Congressman Tom Graves, R-Ga., worries what might happen if the president is hospitalized or otherwise in a state of diminished capacity.
"...Can a group of aggressive Cabinet members interpret a wink or a squeeze of the hand as approval of an autopen signing?" says Graves. "I am very concerned about what this means for future presidential orders, whether they be signing bills into law, military orders, or executive orders."
Republican Rep. Tom Graves questions "autopen" signing
Graves is requesting that President Obama provide a detailed explanation of his authority to delegate this responsibility to a surrogate, "whether it is human, machine, or otherwise."
Interestingly, when the White House put out official word that the president had signed the Patriot Act measure at 11:54 p.m. Thursday night, 6 minutes before the deadline, the announcement did not mention that an autopen had been used.
The White House is defending the use of the autopen, but it will release a photo of the signing machine or even disclose the name of the manufacturer or model number of the device.
Popular in Politics
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice"
- Major immigration overhaul passes first big test
- Top IRS official to invoke 5th Amendment at congressional testimony 126 Comments
- U.S. IDs several men possibly responsible for Benghazi attack
- Va. GOP candidate: Planned Parenthood "more lethal" for blacks than KKK 1201 Comments
- Anthony Weiner comeback try begins: Running for NYC mayor
- Obama: "Full focus" is on recovery from Oklahoma tornado 86 Comments
- Poll: Most think IRS targeting was deliberate 172 Comments
And it fails to mention the the rescheduling of the House calendar by Majority Leader Eric Cantor to provide longer, more frequent ''constituent work weeks:''
''Through much deliberation during the transition process, Members indicated the need to return home to listen to their constituents on a regular basis'' Cantor wrote to his colleagues before the new Congress began.''Accordingly, the schedule will reflect a guaranteed five-day constituent work week at least once each month for Members to visit with .?.?. constituent groups Monday through Friday in their district, rather than just on the weekends.''
Debt ceiling? Too busy.
Deficit reduction? Doesn't fit the schedule.
Patriot Act extension? We're not that worried about terrorists with guns.
Mad about the autopen? Really?
Yes, really. You mean unconstitutional fraud and the abuse of power this particular instrument could foster doesn't anger you? Interesting.
"You mean unconstitutional fraud..."
Until the United States Supreme Court rules that the act is not legally permitted by the constitution of the United States, it is not considered unconstitutional. I love how people take their interpretation of something (i.e. the bible, constitution, etc) to be fact.
"...we conclude that the President need not personally perform the physical act of affixing his signature to a bill he approves and decides to sign in order for the bill to become law. Rather, the President may sign a bill within the meaning of Article I, Section 7 by directing a subordinate to affix the President's signature to such a bill, for example by autopen."
Article 1, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution:
"Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approves he shall sign it..."
Now how the name of chicanery did the OLC "conclude" that? Just where does the Constitution say it's okay for a machine to sign laws?
What happens years from now when the government wants wants to prove to the people that it's had the power to do some legal trickery for years?
Drag out a former president's autopen program to retroactively sign an empowering bit of "legislation", wait for the ink to dry and tell us the law is really decades old?
Has the smack of, (dare I say it?), the Orwellian "Ministry Of Truth", complete with a double-think ridden "Records Department".
No, an electronic signature may be used for many things, but using one to sign legislation is fraudulent, plain and simple. Bad news for anybody who expects the government to respect legalities to the letter.
President Obama was at a G8 meeting in France, something that everyone in the US government knew about for more than a year. Yet Congress could not get its act together to pass this law until hours before it was to expire, and when the President was thousands of miles away? And you think Obama is the problem? Right.
Unless members of Congress planned it this way specifically to embarrass the President and attempt to have the bill they passed fail to become law and then blame it on the President. Are they that Machiavellian, or just stupid?
he needs his nap
Ben Laden is still dead. Wait...he is not. President Obama was not in Pakistan when he gave orders to kill the SOB.
And why are you bringing Sasha into this? Is she part of the White House staff? Shame on you.
Obama considers the Constitution to be a white-man's rule and considers the Constitution to be an obstacle to his Kingship.