While collecting signed books of American Presidents, I was surprised that Lyndon B Johnson books were unusually cheap. On further research, I realised they were signed by an autopen and hence the devaluation. That’s the first time I got to know about autopens.
The Autopen, often called a ‘robot pen’, is a machine that duplicates signatures using an actual pen and ink, rather than by scanning. The device traces its origins to Thomas Jefferson, who extensively used a precursor to the modern autopen.
Patented in 1803, Jefferson’s device copied entire letters in real time as he wrote them. Over time, the technology evolved to use carved templates – a pen would follow a channel etched into plastic to recreate a signature. Modern iterations of the autopen have abandoned physical templates altogether, instead relying on digital programming for precision and ease.
Since Jefferson, various US presidents have employed autopens. Early use was often shrouded in secrecy. Harry Truman, for instance, was rumoured to have used the device, while Gerald Ford openly admitted to relying on it. Lyndon B Johnson, however, famously allowed a photograph of the autopen to appear on the cover of The National Enquirer under the headline, “The Robot That Sits in for the President.”
John F Kennedy’s reliance on the autopen became so significant that it inspired the book The Robot That Helped to Make a President. The book’s author claimed that Kennedy’s dependence on the device made his authentic signature among the rarest of presidential autographs. His openness about the autopen set the stage for successors to adopt it without controversy.
Beyond collecting circles, the autopen’s use has sparked debates about its legal and constitutional implications. In 2005, George W Bush became the first president to inquire about the constitutionality of signing a bill into law with an autopen.
Although the Department of Justice approved its use, Bush refrained from employing it. Notably, he chose to rush back to Washington to sign the controversial Terri Schiavo bill, a decision likely influenced by the life-and-death stakes involved. The ‘Palm Sunday Compromise’, as it became known, allowed federal courts to intervene in Schiavo’s right-to-life case. Bush’s decision highlighted the symbolic weight attached to a president’s signature, especially in sensitive matters.
In contrast, Barack Obama embraced the autopen’s potential for efficiency. In May 2011, he became the first president to sign a bill into law remotely, using the autopen while attending the G8 summit in France. Over his presidency, Obama used the device multiple times, including for the Patriot Act, an appropriations bill signed from Indonesia, and the fiscal cliff bill signed from Hawaii. Despite occasional murmurs from political opponents, the constitutional validity of autopen-signed legislation has yet to face a court challenge. Legal experts remain divided on the matter, with some arguing that the absence of the principal (the president) during the signature process violates proxy laws designed to prevent fraud or undue influence.
The debate over autopen signatures extends beyond politics. In the literary and entertainment worlds, controversies surrounding autopen use often revolve around authenticity. For instance, Sinead O’Connor faced backlash for using a signature stamp on ‘signed’ copies of
her memoir, citing health issues as the reason. Similarly,
Bob Dylan’s use of an autopen for a limited-edition book, marketed as ‘personally signed’, prompted his publisher to issue refunds after collectors discovered the truth. A ‘signed’ edition of author Michael Crichton’s Jurassic Park featuring autopen signatures stirred debate, although other editions came with certificates of authenticity.
These incidents underline a growing tension between the practical benefits of autopens and consumers’ expectations of authenticity. The autopen, rooted in Jefferson’s ingenuity, continues to straddle the line between technological marvel and contentious tool. Its adoption in other industries challenges traditional notions of value and originality and serves as a fascinating case study of how innovation reshapes our understanding of authenticity in a digital age.
(The writer’s views are personal)