Documents related to Prince Harry’s US visa application were unsealed in court but his immigration status was withheld as officials argued it would lead to “harm and harassment”.
Heavily redacted files from the Duke of Sussex’s case were released on Tuesday after a federal judge in Washington ruled in favour of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, as part of a freedom of information request.
The foundation argued that Harry’s right to privacy was outweighed by an “intense public interest” in whether he received special treatment during the application process when he moved to the US with his American wife, Meghan, in 2020.
The released documents consist of 82 pages across seven exhibits, with more than half of the contents blacked out to protect Harry’s privacy. They pertain to the foundation’s efforts to unseal the duke’s visa application, but do not include the application itself, leaving longstanding questions unanswered as to whether Harry lied on his application about his drug use or whether President Biden’s administration decided to overlook it.
Heavily redacted: how one document released on Tuesday looks
The think tank’s argument hinged on revelations in Harry’s 2023 memoir Spare, in which he wrote about taking cocaine, cannabis and psychedelic mushrooms from around the age of 17. Admitting to drug use could lead to an application being rejected, though it is ultimately down to the discretion of immigration officers.
In the documents submitted into evidence on Tuesday, immigration officials said that “speculation by Plaintiffs [the foundation] allege that the records should be disclosed as public confidence in the government would suffer or to establish whether the duke was granted preferential treatment. This speculation by Plaintiffs does not point to any evidence of government misconduct.”
Harry aged 17 with friends at a polo club in Gloucestershire in 2001
GETTY
Harry’s team have maintained he was “truthful” in his application and the legal documents suggested he was not given special treatment by the Biden administration.
The US government had fought for nearly two years against the release of documents pertaining to Harry’s visa application. In the newly released exhibits officials explained that “if we had to produce the CBP [Customs and Border Protection] materials or the DHS [department of homeland security] materials, that wouldn’t tell the whole story. The public doesn’t have an interest in knowing the full story.”
The department of immigration and citizenship said that releasing “his exact status could subject him to reasonably foreseeable harm in the form of harassment as well as unwanted contact by the media and others”. Jarrod Panter, the chief freedom of information officer at the DHS, said the department “routinely protects from disclosure the non-immigrant/immigrant status sought by third parties who do not have permission from the beneficiary to receive this information”.
In September last year, Judge Carl Nichols ruled in favour of the DHS and said public interest did not outweigh Harry’s right to privacy. But in a reversal last week, Nichols ordered the government to file redacted versions of the prince’s application documents into the court docket by Tuesday.
Harry moved to California with Meghan in 2020 after they stepped down as senior royals and his relationship with his family deteriorated. The couple and their two children, Archie and Lilibet, live in Montecito and have plans to stay in America for good. “I very much enjoy living here and bringing my kids up here,” Harry has told The New York Times.
Harry with his wife, Meghan, in an interview with Oprah Winfrey in 2021
JOE PUGLIESE/AP
The Heritage Foundation argued there were only certain ways Harry could have entered the country. Released documents read: “He might have been in possession of a diplomatic visa, but Heritage contended that was unlikely given his status with the royal family … Or he might have disclosed his past drug use and sought a waiver of admission.
“But, Heritage argued, this normally would take several years to attain. Alternatively, the duke may have disclosed his past drug use but have been admitted into the United States without a waiver — which in Heritage’s view would be unlawful.”
Experts have speculated that Harry could have used an A-1 Head of State visa, which entails less stringent security checks, and would have allowed Harry to come and go from the US frequently with no limit on the duration of his stay.
Leading the case for the foundation has been Nile Gardiner, a British-American conservative commentator who is director of the foundation’s Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, and a keen supporter of the British monarchy.
“Most Americans dislike the idea of celebrities being treated differently from anyone else, and Harry’s fame and profile makes this case the ideal window into DHS conduct,” he has previously argued. “If DHS granted Harry special treatment, the implications are obvious: it has likely granted such treatment in the past to others sufficiently famous or sufficiently politically aligned, and will likely continue to do so.”
Gardiner has said that if he was found to have lied, Harry “should face prosecution in the United States as well as deportation”.
The foundation implored President Trump, who has power over the department, to intervene in the case. Trump, however, appeared to rule this out, telling the New York Post: “I’ll leave him alone … He’s got enough problems with his wife. She’s terrible.”
• Explore the best of our journalism from across America on our US homepage
