From the article
” It would have required state and federal courts to accept documents of many different kinds that are notarized by people or computers in other states. The House passed the bill in April by “voice vote” and the Senate passed it unanimously Sept. 27.”
How does this not endorse robosigning?
You are quoting someone’s interpretation of the law. If you look at the actual law, it allows electronic signatures if they are properly notarized. Which still means originally signed in the presence of a notary, even if that signature is then communicated electronically.
Yes, this does all get into the whole “valid electronic signature” issue, which frankly I hadn’t concerned myself with because that is an argument far wider than just the mortgage security issue.
But this bill isn’t creating electronic signatures, it is creating a right of notary within a state to apply to other states. That notary is already covered by electronic signature laws, so this law includes both physical and electronic signatures.