Prince Harry faces having sensitive immigration material scoured by judge
As the case continues for sensitive documents relating to Prince Harry’s US visa application to be made public, a judge has ordered the US Department of Homeland Security to hand them over for his review.
Prince Harry’s sensitive immigration material may be scoured by a judge.
Papers relating to the 39-year-old Duke of Sussex’s documents could be released to Judge Carl Nichols after he ordered the US Department of Homeland Security to hand them over for his review while he decides whether to make them public.
The judge’s move, reported by Mail Online, comes after the official told the DGS its arguments in the case over Harry’s papers were so far were “insufficiently detailed” for him to make a decision.
DHS bosses may now be forced to give him declarations explaining the “particular harm” that would arise from the disclosure of Harry’s visa application.
Last month, judge Nichols heard from DHS and the Heritage Foundation, which is seeking to release the material as part of a Freedom of Information request it filed last year.
The think tank claims Harry could have lied about taking drugs in his immigration paperwork despite admitting doing cocaine and marijuana in his memoir ‘Spare’ and talking about his use of drugs on his Netflix show.
If Harry did not admit the truth about his use of outlawed substances he could be removed from the US, where he lives with his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, 42, and their children Archie, four, and two-year-old Lilibet, or be barred by a border agent.
Judge Nichols’ document release order states the Freedom of Information law authorized him to review “declarations and/or contested records”.
He said: “Having reviewed the parties’ written submissions and heard oral argument on the motions, the court concludes that in camera review is necessary to determine whether the records in dispute come within the scope of the claimed exemptions.”
Judge Nichols has given the DHS until March 21 to submit declarations that detail the records it is “withholding” and the “particular harm that would arise from public disclosure of them”.
