WASHINGTON — An investigation into whether former President Joe Biden improperly used an autopen to sign official presidential documents has been closed after prosecutors concluded they could not build a viable criminal case, according to people familiar with the matter.

The inquiry had drawn attention because it followed repeated calls from President Donald Trump for federal investigators to examine the legality of certain documents signed during Biden’s presidency, including a number of pardons issued near the end of his term.

According to reporting by The New York Times, prosecutors within the United States Department of Justice examined whether Biden or members of his staff violated federal law by using an autopen device — a machine that reproduces a person’s signature — on official paperwork. After reviewing the available evidence, investigators determined they could not move forward with charges.

The decision effectively closes one of several politically sensitive inquiries that emerged amid a broader effort by Trump and his allies to scrutinize the actions of the previous administration.

A longstanding presidential practice

Autopen devices have been used by U.S. presidents for decades to sign large volumes of official documents, including legislation, letters and ceremonial proclamations. Legal scholars have generally viewed the practice as permissible so long as the president authorizes the signature.

Past administrations from both political parties have relied on the technology, particularly when documents must be signed quickly or when the president is traveling. The practice has occasionally drawn criticism from political opponents, but courts and executive branch lawyers have historically recognized its legality.

During the recent inquiry, investigators examined whether any circumstances surrounding Biden’s use of the device could suggest misconduct or raise questions about the authorization of specific signatures.

According to people familiar with the review, prosecutors were unable to identify evidence that would support criminal charges.

Political pressure and legal limits

The investigation was conducted by the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, which is led by Jeanine Pirro, a longtime ally of Trump. Individuals briefed on the matter said the inquiry was quietly shelved in recent months after prosecutors concluded the evidence did not support an indictment.

The episode reflects broader tensions surrounding the Justice Department’s role during highly polarized political periods. Critics have expressed concern that prosecutors have faced pressure to open investigations into Trump’s political opponents.

Several cases launched in response to such pressure have struggled to gain traction. Some proposed indictments have been rejected by grand juries, while others have been dismissed by judges or dropped by prosecutors after further review.

Legal experts note that grand jury refusals are historically uncommon in federal court. When they occur, they can signal that prosecutors lack sufficient evidence to meet the legal threshold required to proceed with charges.

Other investigations under scrutiny

The autopen review was not the only inquiry tied to Trump’s political disputes that encountered difficulties.

Prosecutors in Washington also sought an indictment against six Democratic lawmakers who had posted a video message reminding members of the military and intelligence community that they are obligated to refuse unlawful orders. According to people familiar with the case, a grand jury declined to issue an indictment.

Separately, the administration approved a criminal investigation involving Jerome Powell, whom Trump has repeatedly criticized over economic policy and interest rates.

In another development that drew national attention, the Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted a search of an election office in the Atlanta area as part of an inquiry connected to claims about irregularities in the 2020 presidential election — allegations that multiple courts and election officials previously found lacked evidence.

A continuing political rivalry

Trump has frequently criticized Biden and questioned the legitimacy of actions taken during his presidency, including the pardons issued in his final months in office. Some of Trump’s allies have argued that those decisions should be examined more closely.

Others, including former federal prosecutors and constitutional scholars, say the closing of the autopen investigation highlights the difficulty of turning political disputes into criminal cases without clear evidence of wrongdoing.

The inquiry also illustrates the broader challenge facing the Justice Department when allegations intersect with political rivalries. Prosecutors must balance demands for investigations with the legal standards required to bring charges in federal court.

A symbolic controversy

The dispute has extended beyond legal filings into symbolic gestures. According to people familiar with the White House décor, displays of presidential portraits included a controversial arrangement in which an image of an autopen appeared in the place typically reserved for Biden’s official portrait.

While largely symbolic, the display underscored the intensity of the political rivalry between the two leaders.

For now, the Justice Department’s decision to end the investigation closes one chapter of that conflict. But as the country moves deeper into another election cycle, the legal and political battles between Trump and Biden — and their allies — appear likely to continue shaping Washington’s debate over the boundaries between politics and the justice system.