19 March 2025, 00:11
One major question is whether the prince admitted to taking drugs on the form, which he later admitted in his memoir, Spare.
One major question is whether the prince admitted to taking drugs on the form, which he later admitted in his memoir, Spare. Picture: Getty
By Josef Al Shemary
Documents related to the Duke of Sussex’s visa application to enter the US have been unsealed in court, although heavily redacted.
Loading audio...
The documents are heavily blacked out, and there are no details about the contents of Harry’s immigration form.
One major question is whether the prince admitted to taking drugs on the form, which he later admitted in his memoir, Spare.
The records show that a judge ruled in September that the Duke’s immigration status was not in the public interest, and thus certain details should remain private.
Harry could be subjected to harassment and ‘unwanted contact’ from the media if his visa records were disclosed, the US government told a court.
Read more:‘It’s a crisis’ - Top Tesla investor calls for ‘divisive’ Elon Musk to step down as CEO as stocks keep plunging
Read more:'It's a lot of stuff' - Trump releases 80,000 classified pages relating to JFK assassination, honouring campaign promise
A judge in Washington DC ruled last year that Harry's US visa application should remain private despite him admitting taking drugs in his book.
The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank based in the US capital, claimed the book’s reference to taking cocaine, marijuana and psychedelic mushrooms should have disqualified him from getting a visa to enter the US.
Application forms for the US ask specifically if the person applying has used drugs before, or currently uses them.
Not much detail was released about Harry’s immigration status - neither was his visa form.
Has Prince Harry obtained complete accountability after settling with The Sun's publishers?
In documents relating to the case that were made public on Tuesday, a chief freedom of information officer within the US Department for Homeland Security (DHS) argued that releasing the material "would potentially expose the individual to harm from members of the public".
The declaration from Jarrod Panter, submitted to the court in April last year, read: "The USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) 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.
"To release such information would potentially expose the individual to harm from members of the public who might have a reason to manipulate or harass individuals depending on their status in the United States."
The declaration, which contained a number of redactions, added: "To release 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."
The Heritage Foundation brought the lawsuit against the DHS after a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request was rejected, with the think tank claiming it was of "immense public interest".
In his ruling in September last year, US Judge Carl Nichols said the public's interest in disclosure of Harry's immigration records is "outweighed by the duke's privacy interest".
A transcript of the private hearing from April 30 last year was disclosed by the court, but 32 out of the 42 pages of the transcript were fully redacted.
In his controversial memoir, the duke said cocaine "didn't do anything for me", adding: "Marijuana is different, that actually really did help me."