US court hearing challenge over Harry’s visa after drug use revelations
Harry's reference to taking drugs in his memoir prompted a think tank to question why he was allowed into the States.
Prince Harry is at the centre of another court case – this time in the US, where the government is being challenged over its decision to grant him a visa despite his admissions of illegal drug use.
The Duke of Sussex’s reference to taking cocaine, cannabis and magic mushrooms in his memoir Spare prompted a conservative think tank to question why he was allowed into the States in 2020.
The Heritage Foundation is suing the Department for Homeland Security (DHS) to release his immigration files after a Freedom of Information request was rejected.
Speaking after the first Federal court hearing in the case, Dr Nile Gardiner, from the think tank, told reporters the lawsuit was about holding a high-profile figure and the US Government to account.
‘At the end of the day, this is about accountability, transparency and openness on behalf of the US administration with regard to an immigration application by a high-profile individual,’ he said.
During Tuesday’s hearing in Washington, the think tank’s lawyer Samuel Dewey said their case was about the Duke of Sussex, but also about the DHS’s ‘compliance with the law’.
He told reporters afterwards: ‘The interest here is in the drug question.
‘Stuff that’s unrelated, we would expect them to redact and we’re fine with that. We’re not on a voyeuristic fishing expedition here.’
The request has largely been denied since the group doesn’t have Prince Harry’s permission to get the private information.
John Bardo, an attorney for the Department of Homeland Security, said: ‘A person’s visa status is confidential.’
Those applying for US visas are routinely asked about drug use and it has caused headaches for several celebrities, including chef Nigella Lawson, singer Amy Winehouse, and model Kate Moss.
But acknowledgement of past drug use doesn’t necessarily bar people from entering or staying in the country.
The case hinges on how Harry answered two questions in the application form – ‘Have you ever been a drug abuser or addict?’ and ‘Have you ever violated, or engaged in a conspiracy to violate, any law relating to controlled substances?’ – and could potentially result in his removal from the country.
In his controversial memoir, the duke said cocaine ‘didn’t do anything for me’, adding: ‘Marijuana is different, that actually really did help me.’
Speaking after the hearing, Dr Gardiner said Harry had become a ‘household name’ in the US, adding: ‘He is actively engaged on a number of causes, has done multiple high-profile interviews, has taken part in a Netflix documentary that’s been watched by tens of millions of Americans – so he’s a big figure.’
Addressing why the think tank had brought the case, he told reporters: ‘This is really ultimately about US immigration law, ensuring that it is applied fairly and equally to everybody.
‘No one should be above the law and no one should receive preferential treatment.
‘In light of Prince Harry’s extensive illegal drug use, we believe he should be held to account with regard to his application.
‘He’s put it all out there, let’s see whether that exactly matches what he put on his immigration application.
‘Because if it doesn’t, that’s perjury and that’s a criminal offence, and everyone should be held to account before the law – no one should be treated any differently.’
On Tuesday, the Heritage Foundation attempted to seek a preliminary injunction – meaning they wanted to compel all relevant sections of the DHS to respond to their Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request over the duke’s immigration papers.
Judge Nichols was told one section was yet to respond, meaning the court could not deal with arguments over whether specific information should be released.
The judge gave DHS a week to indicate whether it would be willing to respond to, or expedite, the request for information by the think tank.
It comes after Harry became the first royal to give evidence in court for more than a century when he was sworn in as a witness at the High Court in London in his individual case against Mirror Group Newspapers over alleged unlawful information gathering.
He described having ‘experienced hostility from the press since I was born’ and branded journalists the ‘mothership of online trolling’.
The duke the tabloid press for ‘inciting hatred and harassment’ in his private life and told the court saying he ended up ‘playing up to a lot of the headlines’, having been cast as a ‘playboy prince’ and a ‘thicko’ when he was younger.
But Andrew Green KC for MGN accused Harry of operating ‘in the realms of total speculation’ over his belief that information for one Mirror story was obtained through unlawful means.
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.