Use of auto pen is it legal ???

beta.news.yahoo.com...

Obama's team relied on a 29-page legal analysis crafted during the administration of President George W. Bush to argue that the faux signature passed constitutional muster.

ok so they, Obama's legal team say it will pass but do we the people say it so? I am no way a constitutional expert who is the question is does it nee to be personally signed that is to say does the person signing a doc need to be physically in front of; and with, by human hand sign or will this be ok ? What say ye the people. from the link

It's the open secret that nobody in government wants to talk about: That cherished presidential signature that's tucked away in a scrapbook or framed for all to see might never have passed under the president's hand.

should it be used just for that? what do you think?
mods if this is old , or already up as a thread then you know what to do.

Letting laws be signed by a machine opens up a world of opportunity for abuse. It should not be allowed.

It is perfectly legal and was first used by Thomas Jefferson way back when.

I'm sure if a founding father had no issue with it than it's Constitutional

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Schkeptick
that is one no.
May i ask if your are in the US? If so have you let your congress rep /sen know how you feel?

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by Schkeptick

 

that is one no.
May i ask if your are in the US? If so have you let your congress rep /sen know how you feel?

Hi - I am American but do not live in the USA right now. I missed it - is this coming before Congress?

reply to post by kro32
yes it is true he used a version of it, but not on official docs/ law and pres orders. This is my question is it ok for this type of use?
one for yes

reply to post by bekod


If your asking if it's constitutional the answer would be that it's not addressed at all in the Constitution so that doesn't apply. That would leave you with the question of is it legal. According to Congress yes it is since i've heard of no bill being passed saying otherwise so the bottom line is yes it's legal.

reply to post by Schkeptick
to answer your question coming be for congress, some republicans are saying the of this is not legal, and obama needs to re-sign the"P act".

reply to post by kro32
do you know the law of the Constitution? No other pres has used it in this way Bush brought up the issue but never used it in this manner, if bush cabinet's legal reps said yes do you not think he would have used it with all of his camp Davide trips ? why did he cut them short, fly back to DC, and personally sign docs? the answer to leave out the controversy.
another yes

Originally posted by Schkeptick
Letting laws be signed by a machine opens up a world of opportunity for abuse. It should not be allowed.

...only in a pen-hacker's dreams.

Originally posted by Schkeptick

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by Schkeptick

 

that is one no.
May i ask if your are in the US? If so have you let your congress rep /sen know how you feel?

Hi - I am American but do not live in the USA right now. I missed it - is this coming before Congress?

If I'm not mistaken, Obama used it just recently in regards to one of our many military 'operations' since he was out of the country when he signed it. (I remember reading a blurb about it in the paper and thinking... HuH???) It was not long after the Fukishima tsunami, as I recall. Ring a bell with anyone?

Thx for the link Kro...

Wow is that some scary info on there...

HE DIDNT EVEN PERSONALLY SIGN THE PATRIOT ACT? Think im gonna throw up here...

On May 27, 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama became the first president to use an autopen to sign a bill into law.[2] While visiting France, he authorized the use of an autopen to create his signature which signed into law an extension of three key provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act.[3] Republican leaders have raised questions as to whether this use of the Autopen meets the Constitutional requirement for signing a bill into law.[

Oh well, there is always the first time. I am sensing the use of "auto-pen" is legal as long as the original INTENT behind the signature is valid and reliable. I am also sensing that machines/computers have already infiltrated, if not, taken over/supported the lives of "hu-mans". The only drawback is making each signature PERSONAL (as in accountable) at the moment of signing. Copying and pasting ORIGINAL signature(s) from past event(s) doesn't feel correct or material to use via "auto pen" in future event(s).

Bump!
Very interesting! I always thought the auto pen was only used for publicity items, form letters etc....

This cannot be permitted and should negate any bill signed by such a device. Lazy Lazy Lazy. Whatever happened to signing these bills with 50 ceremonial pens in an official manner.

Keep an eye on this one...

wow i thought this would get a lot more replies, it seems the laws we in the us live by do not mean any thing so let TPTB win, who cares any more. thank you to all that replied. i think it is even on the count of who say it is and it is not, congress should just throw in towel and say yes king obama you are the king not the pres.

While it is lazy and completely disregards any semblance of care, as long as the President has authorized the use of the autopen, as recognized as his signature and intent, then I don't really have a problem with it. Abuse has Congress and the citizenry as checks and balances.

/TOA

reply to post by The Old American
one more for yes
ok lets say he is out of the US and marshal law is needed to be declared the auto pen fails, a sec of foreign affairs signs the law as the pres with the pres ok/ order is it legal? not that this would happen just saying if some one had to sign it as the pres tracing the pres just like the auto pen does, is it legal. if not why

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by The Old American

 

one more for yes
ok lets say he is out of the US and marshal law is needed to be declared the auto pen fails, a sec of foreign affairs signs the law as the pres with the pres ok/ order is it legal? not that this would happen just saying if some one had to sign it as the pres tracing the pres just like the auto pen does, is it legal. if not why

edit on 27-6-2011 by bekod because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by bekod because: editting

That I am aware of, it is not legal. In order to impose martial law, Congress must issue the suspension of habeas corpus, while the President can authorize use of military resources (however unwisely) against the citizenry. So not only does martial law have to be a joint decision by two branches of Congress, it can only be declared by them, with no proctors speaking for either.

/TOA

It is as long as the current POTUS is faxed, emailed the law in q to read it over when traveling and when they have that activates the Autopen!

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by The Old American

 

one more for yes
ok lets say he is out of the US and marshal law is needed to be declared the auto pen fails, a sec of foreign affairs signs the law as the pres with the pres ok/ order is it legal? not that this would happen just saying if some one had to sign it as the pres tracing the pres just like the auto pen does, is it legal. if not why

edit on 27-6-2011 by bekod because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by bekod because: editting

That I am aware of, it is not legal. In order to impose martial law, Congress must issue the suspension of habeas corpus, while the President can authorize use of military resources (however unwisely) against the citizenry. So not only does martial law have to be a joint decision by two branches of Congress, it can only be declared by them, with no proctors speaking for either.

/TOA

You are incorrect.

www.slate.com...