A judge has ordered the Department of Homeland Security to turn over confidential material about Prince Harry’s immigration documents for review while it decides whether to make them public.
Judge Carl Nichols told DHS that its arguments so far were “insufficiently detailed” for him to make a decision.
He asked the agency, which oversees immigration, to give him statements explaining the “particular harm” that would arise from disclosure of the Duke of Sussex’s visa application.
The development came after a Washington court hearing last month in which Judge Nichols heard from DHS and the Heritage Foundation, which is seeking to make the material public.
The Heritage Foundation is seeking release of the documents as part of a Freedom of Information request it filed last year.
Prince Harry’s immigration file could become public after judge reviews it privately
The DHS had argued that releasing Harry’s records would be an invasion of the Duke’s privacy.
Judge Carl Nichols wants more information about Prince Harry’s application so he can make a decision on whether to make the immigration documents public.
In his memoir Spare, Harry admitted to using drugs such as marijuana, cocaine and magic mushrooms.
A US think tank is seeking to force the Department of Homeland Security to release Harry’s immigration records to determine whether the Duke admitted to his drug use.
The think tank claimed Harry may have lied about taking drugs in his immigration paperwork despite admitting to doing so in his memoir and on the Netflix show.
If the duke didn’t tell the truth on his entry forms, a border agent could remove him from the U.S. or ban him.
In an order filed with the Washington court, Judge Nichols declared that the Freedom of Information law authorized him to review “challenged statements and/or records behind closed doors.”
Doing so would help you determine if any exemptions that prevent documents from being made public apply.
Such review is appropriate when ‘agency affidavits are not sufficiently detailed to permit meaningful review of waiver requests…when the number of documents withheld is relatively small and when the dispute turns on the content of the documents. retained documents and not to the interpretations of the parties. of those documents,’ the order said.
Judge Nichols said: “Having reviewed the parties’ written submissions and heard oral arguments on the motions, the court concludes that a closed review is necessary to determine whether the disputed records fall within the scope of the claimed exemptions.” .
Judge Nichols gave DHS until March 21 to submit statements detailing “the records it is withholding and the particular harm that would arise from their public disclosure,” his order said.
The review will be carried out behind closed doors, that is, it will be carried out by the judge in private.
DHS has until March 21 to comply with Judge Nichols’ order on Harry’s records.
In an interview on ABC’s Good Morning America on Friday, Harry said he was considering becoming a U.S. citizen.
Harry said U.S. citizenship had crossed his mind, but it wasn’t a high priority for him at the moment.
In his memoir, ‘Spare,’ which was published last January, and in the Netflix show ‘Harry & Meghan,’ about the duke and his wife, Meghan Markle, Harry was frank about his past drug use.
He admitted to using cocaine and marijuana in the past, and once said that cannabis helped heal the trauma of his mother’s death.
The duke said that using ayahuasca, the psychedelic drug, he realized his mother wanted him to be “happy.”
Despite this, Harry’s US visa application in March 2020 could show that he checked the “no” box on questions about his drug use, The Heritage Foundation claims.
In its legal filing, DHS said the records in question are “particularly sensitive” because they “would reveal Harry’s (immigration) status in the United States.”
The DHS has claimed that Harry still has a right to privacy even though he is a celebrity.
Heritage has claimed in legal papers that the fact that Harry is so open about his private life means he has lost that right.
During last month’s hearing, DHS lawyers said Harry’s claims about his drug use in ‘Spare’ may not have been true and may have been there only to sell books.
“The book is not sworn testimony or evidence,” John Bardo told the court. “Saying something in a book doesn’t necessarily make it true.”
Donald Trump waded into the controversy and suggested he could expel Harry from the United States if he wins a second term.
The former president said he “would not protect” Harry because he had “betrayed the Queen.”
Trump said that if he wins the election in November, Harry “would be alone.”