Prince Harry’s US visa documents will NOT be made public, judge rules

Prince Harry’s visa documents will not be made public, a judge has ruled, in a major victory for the Duke of Sussex.

Judge Carl Nichols said Harry had a “reasonable privacy interest” in his US immigration documents and therefore they should remain private.

However, the judge did agree that Harry had revealed “intimate details” about his life in his memoir Spare, including a description of freezing his genitals.

And Harry’s privacy interests were somewhat compromised by the fact that he was a public figure, the judge said.

The decision comes after Judge Nichols spent five months reviewing Harry’s immigration record as part of a case brought by the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank based in Washington, D.C.

The Duke of Sussex’s visa application was thrown into doubt after he admitted in his 2023 memoir to using various drugs recreationally – something he should have disclosed in his immigration documents

Heritage filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) after the agency, which oversees immigration, refused to release a Freedom of Information Act request for Harry’s records.

Heritage alleges that Harry may have lied on the forms under the section asking if he had been a drug user.

In his memoir ‘Spare’ and his Netflix TV series, Harry talks about using cannabis, cocaine and magic mushrooms.

Judge Nichols noted during the court hearing in Washington, DC, that Harry’s memoir, Spare, sold more than 1.4 million copies on its first day of sales and became a New York Times bestseller.

Judge Nichols said the book shared “intimate details of his life,” including “numerous instances” of Harry using drugs.

According to the judge, Harry had a “reasonable interest in protecting his immigration records.”

Harry spoke about using drugs such as cannabis, cocaine and magic mushrooms in his 2023 memoir, ‘Spare’, as well as in his Netflix TV series

Judge Nichols said Heritage “is partly correct that the Duke’s public statements as a public figure undermine the Duke’s privacy interests as compared to those of ordinary foreigners admitted to the United States.”

The advice states: ‘But (Heritage) goes too far with the statement that the privacy interest is reduced to such an extent by his public statements that it is de minimis’, using a Latin word for ‘very small’.

Judge Nicholas added that the Duke’s public statements about his drug use did not negate his interest in keeping information about his immigration status secret

The judge specifically said that Harry had never disclosed “the following facts,” but the following paragraph was omitted.

Heritage’s argument that releasing Harry’s documents would shed light on DHS’s operating practices “failed,” the ruling said.

“For the reasons discussed, the public has no significant interest in the disclosure of the Duke’s immigration records,” the order said.

The judge said some of the documents DHS had turned over to him were “of particular importance,” but the sentence was followed by a long paragraph that was omitted.

In March, DHS attorneys asked for more time to comply with a judge’s order to provide more information about why it wouldn’t release the data

Judge Carl Nichols (left) ordered the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to provide more information in March about why his immigration records must remain secret. Nile Gardiner (right) of the Heritage Foundation is leading the Freedom of Information Act request

Much of the ‘particularly relevant’ information was also omitted.

DHS turned Harry’s immigration papers over to Judge Nichols for review in April.

He wanted to see the “specific harm” that would occur if the material were made public.

Judge Nichols told Homeland Security that the arguments it had presented so far, including at a hearing in February, were “insufficiently detailed” to make a ruling.

The case took on a new dimension when Donald Trump suggested he could expel Harry from the country if he won in November.

By dropping the case, Harry prevents embarrassing revelations about his private life from coming out in the future.

During the February hearing, a DHS attorney alleged that Harry may have lied about his drug use to boost sales of “Spare.”

Assistant U.S. Attorney John Bardo told the court in Washington: “The book is not sworn testimony or evidence.

‘Just because you say something in a book doesn’t mean it’s true.’

In legal documents, Heritage alleged that Harry’s discussion of drugs was so brazen that it “approached the point of bragging and encouraging illegal drug use.”