The latest twist in Prince Harry’s US visa saga has been dubbed “dodgy” by the same right-wing Washington DC think-tank that tried to get the Dukes immigration records released.
A judge decreed earlier this week that despite Prince Harry’s own confessions of drug use in his tell-all book, ‘Spare,’ his US visa details should be kept under wraps.
Caught up in a storm of controversy following the January 2023 release of ‘Spare,’ where Harry admitted to past dabbling with drugs in a move which could jeopardise a US visa under American laws the Heritage Foundation was swift to act.
READ MORE: Horror CCTV released of ‘amazing’ Brit dad killed with vodka bottle on stag do
Click for more of the latest newsfrom the Daily Star
(Image: (Image: Getty))
The group launched a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security to unearth Harry’s visa dossier, reckoning it a matter of “immense public interest”.
However, Judge Carl Nichols, viewing court papers on Monday (September 23), insisted: “The public does not have a strong interest in disclosure of the Duke’s immigration records”, reports the Express.
This development led Mike Howell, of the think-tank’s Oversight Project, to say the “Prince Harry scandal just got a lot more suspicious”.
(Image: (Image: Getty))
Mr Howell told Newsweek, the think-tank is far from done as they’re gearing up to appeal the court’s decision, and pointed out: “President Trump has already suggested that Prince Harry will be deported next year – and the case for that just got a lot more compelling! Americans deserve an immigration system with both secure borders and also fairly applied rules for high-profile immigrants like Harry.”
He then stated: “It certainly appears that Harry was given special treatment… and now we know it for something so serious that it involves extensive redactions. Americans will know the full story soon enough… Perhaps, Mr and Mrs Markle will tell us what’s beneath the redactions on their next Netflix special.”
The bench led by Judge Nichols concluded: “Like any foreign national, the duke has a legitimate privacy interest in his immigration status.”
Additionally, he declared: “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.”
Judge Nichols summed up his verdict by emphasising that the need for disclosure of Harry’s immigration files pales in comparison to the Duke’s right to privacy, noting, “Public disclosure of records about a single admission of a foreign national in the circumstances described above would provide the public, at best, limited information about the department’s general policy in admitting aliens.”
“And the marginal public benefit of knowing that limited information is outweighed by the privacy interest the duke retains in his immigration status and records.”