Harry’s visa application to remain private, US judge rules

By Susie Coen and Victoria Ward.
The Duke of Sussex’s immigration records will remain private, a judge has ruled, after a 20-month legal battle surrounding his admission of drug taking.
‌A Washington DC-based think tank failed in its legal bid to access the documents which it launched on the grounds that Prince Harry waived his right to privacy when he divulged personal details in his memoir.
The Heritage Foundation had questioned how the royal had been able to relocate to the US after he admitted to taking cocaine and other illegal drugs in his book, Spare.
READ MORE: King gives woman ‘the surprise of her life’ on her birthday
It brought a lawsuit against the Department for Homeland Security (DHS) after it rejected a Freedom of Information Act request for access to the records.
In documents partially unsealed on Monday, judge Carl J Nichols ruled that “the public does not have a strong interest in disclosure of the duke’s immigration records”.
His judgement added: “Like any foreign national, the duke has a legitimate privacy interest in his immigration status.
“And the Duke’s public statements about his travel and drug use did not disclose, and therefore did not eliminate his interest in keeping private, specific information regarding his immigration status, applications, or other materials.”
The Heritage Foundation could still appeal the ruling.
Visa applicants are legally obliged to declare whether they have taken drugs. While it does not constitute an automatic ban, failure to do so can lead to deportation.
READ MORE: Prince Harry pays tribute to Princess Diana in New York
Anyone classed as a “drug abuser” is in danger of being deemed “inadmissible” and celebrities including Nigella Lawson have been prevented from entering the country after admitting drug use.
The DHS had argued in court that visa and immigration records were deemed “personal information exempt from disclosure”.
But the Heritage Foundation said the Duke had waived his right to privacy when he “sold every aspect of his private life for, in some estimates, over $135 million”.
The judge said the court reviewed the Duke’s records and the “particular harm” that would arise from making them public.
He agreed that the Heritage Foundation was “partially correct” that Harry’s public statements “diminish his privacy interests” compared to ordinary foreign nationals.
But, he said, the think tank “goes too far in arguing that that privacy interest is so diminished by his public status as to be de minimis.”
Earlier this month a court document revealed the case had been closed, but the ruling was kept under seal and has only just been made public.
Part of the decision remains redacted, including several sentences which detail facts contained in Harry’s immigration files which he has not disclosed publicly.
The judge wrote that it was the “type of information that a person would ordinarily not wish to make known about himself”.
Mike Howell, executive director of the Heritage Oversight Project, said the think tank is looking into appealing the judge’s decision.
“The Prince Harry scandal just got a lot more suspicious”, he said.
For a daily dose of 9honey, subscribe to our newsletter here.
“While our case is far from over as we explore appeal, I’d say that these very curious redactions point to something serious afoot.”
Noting that Donald Trump had refused to rule out deporting Harry if he were to be re-elected in November, Mr Howell said: “the case for that just got a lot more compelling.”
He added: “It certainly appears that Harry was given special treatment and now we know it’s for something so serious that it involves extensive redactions… Perhaps Mr and Mrs Markle will tell us what’s beneath the redactions on their next Netflix special.”
© Telegraph Media Group Limited 2024
FOLLOW US ON WHATSAPP HERE: Stay across all the latest in celebrity, lifestyle and opinion via our WhatsApp channel. No comments, no algorithm and nobody can see your private details.