Prince Harry Should Not Have Been Admitted to U.S.—Legal Filing Claims
A right wing think tank has argued “there was no proper method” by which Prince Harry “could have been admitted” to America in a court filing.
The Heritage Foundation is suing the Biden Administration in an effort to force the release of the prince’s visa records.
They argue Prince Harry would have been required to disclose any past drug use during the immigration process and say that if he was honest about it then he should have been denied entry to America.
Prince Harry leaves the New York Times annual DealBook summit at Jazz at Lincoln Center, in New York City, on December 4, 2024. Harry’s visa is at the center of a lawsuit.
Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
However, Judge Carl J. Nichols terminated the case in September after privately reviewing confidential Department of Homeland Security (DHS) files.
Most of his reasoning remained sealed, a move Heritage argue denied them a chance to challenge the DHS’ private disclosures to the judge.
“[Heritage] submitted there was no proper method by which the Duke of Sussex could have been admitted,” lawyers for Heritage wrote in a filing, seen by Newsweek.
“Thus, [Heritage’s] point is that if [DHS] ‘paroled’ the Duke of Sussex into the country in the same manner as illegal aliens pouring over the Nation’s Southern Border that would be so illogical and illegal that [Heritage] did not even think it in issue.”
A recent Government filing, seen by Newsweek, read: “The evidence before the Court plainly sufficed to show that [Heritage’s] speculation of impropriety was unfounded.”
The assertion was intended to rebut a passage from a filing by the judge given at the end of the case in which Nichols stated: “Heritage’s first argument is based on its contention that in March 2020 the Duke entered the United States either by disclosing his past drug use (and was admitted inappropriately) or failing to disclose his past drug use.
“As Heritage puts it, ‘[I]f the records fail to shed light on those questions, or show that in fact the expected impropriety did not occur then the case immediately is at an end; there is no need to evaluate the sufficiency of Plaintiffs’ asserted public interest or conduct the complex balancing inquiry. Judgement may simply be entered for Defendant’.”
Heritage lawyers say that in fact they were arguing it is not possible for Harry to have been admitted into America in a proper way.
The argument does, though, run contrary to the perspectives of some lawyers who argue it is possible, for example, that the prince could have obtained a waiver.
Neama Rahmani, president of West Coast Trial Lawyers, previously told Newsweek: “It is impossible to know if the department will act on the Heritage Foundation’s request because immigration files are confidential and not public.
“But if they do act, Prince Harry may be able to get a waiver by arguing his drug use is in remission. Someone is considered in remission after a year of sobriety. A waiver request requires a doctor to submit medical documentation.”
U.K. based immigration lawyers Chavin have also speculated Harry may be on a diplomatic visa, which does not require such background checks: “When a foreign national seeking entry to the United States admits to using controlled substances, this can trigger criminal and mental health related grounds for inadmissibility.
“Prince Harry, however, is likely not subject to the standard security and background check measures because, we theorize, he is traveling on an A-1 Head of State visa.”
Were that true, however, Heritage might argue it was not “proper” for Harry to be on a diplomatic visa.
Either way, they are calling for currently secret documents to made public: “This Court should vacate its opinion and order, enter all ex parte correspondence on the docket, unseal ex parte correspondence consistent with the Opinion, direct the Plaintiffs to brief any legal issues raised in the ex parte declarations or relating to the ex parte declarations, and allow Plaintiffs to brief procedures to ameliorate the lack of adversarial testing,” their court filing read.
Jack Royston is chief royal correspondent at Newsweek based in London. You can find him on Twitter at @jack_royston and read his stories on Newsweek‘s The Royals Facebook page.
Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email royals@newsweek.com. We’d love to hear from you.