The Heritage Foundation got a court hearing over Prince Harry’s visa application

The Heritage Foundation is still trying to get their hands on Prince Harry’s visa application in America. We don’t exactly know the specifics of Harry’s legal and tax status in America, but I suspect he’s classified as a resident alien, married to an American citizen and paying taxes here in America. I also suspect that he’s already started – or will soon start – his green card application. Prince Harry is a wealthy man with a lot of access, and I trust that he has great immigration lawyers helping him navigate the American immigration system. The Heritage Foundation is relying on British readers of “niche” British newspapers not understanding the complexities of American immigration. Heritage’s lawsuit is a big setpiece designed solely to attack Harry in the British media and to convince British readers that Harry could be “deported” from America. Well, next week, Heritage’s lawyers will be in court for a hearing about how badly they want to get their hands on Harry’s visa application.

The US government will appear in court next week to answer questions over Prince Harry’s visa application, after he detailed his drug use in his tell-all memoir. The case has been brought by the conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation, which is demanding the release of the Duke of Sussex’s American visa application. The US government has so far refused to release it, despite a freedom of information request.

A federal judge in Washington will hear arguments from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Heritage Foundation on Tuesday, June 6, deciding whether to compel officials to release the Duke’s immigration records to the public. The hearing is the first of what is likely to be many more motions and hearings. Judge Carl J Nichols, appointed to the court by Donald Trump, is expected to make a written statement at a later date.

Nile Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Centre for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation, said the hearing was a “very significant development”.

“It significantly raises the stakes here,” he told the Telegraph. “I think that so far the Biden administration has been stonewalling the freedom of information request. But ultimately, this issue will be settled by a federal judge.”

The Heritage Foundation has argued that it is in the public interest for the authorities to divulge what the Duke said on his application, and the details of any waiver he was granted, including the identity of the person making the decision.

“The American people deserve answers to the serious questions raised by the evidence. Did DHS in fact look the other way, play favourites, or fail to appropriately respond to any potential false statements by Prince Harry?” the think tank said in a statement on Tuesday.

Mr Gardiner told The Telegraph: “It’s in the public interest for the American people to know exactly what was in Prince Harry’s immigration application. And if he has nothing to hide he should support the release of the records.”

[From The Telegraph]

Spoiler: it’s not in the public interest to publicly release a resident alien’s visa application. Harry is not running for public office. Harry is not being charged with a crime. Harry is not a foreign national purchasing an American TV station. Those are the only situations where one could argue that his visa application is “in the public interest.” Simply saying that “he’s a famous British prince living in America with his family and he wrote about his past drug use” is not a sufficient legal argument for “it’s in the public’s interest.” The legal argument from the Heritage Foundation doesn’t even make any sense – they have no idea and no evidence that Harry “lied” on the application. It’s a fishing expedition targeting a celebrity, an expedition led by niche British publications working in concert with a right-wing think-tank.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

108 Responses to “The Heritage Foundation got a court hearing over Prince Harry’s visa application”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. My god the depths they will sink to make something out of absolutely nothing. Just riling the deranged up so harm will come to Harry.

    • Mary Pester says:

      @susanCollins, Susan I can’t for the life of me understand why the courts are even entertaining this crap. Harry is not a drug dealer or radled addict. He has no conviction so why the hell are they allowing this to continue. If I were Harry’s lawyer I would be asking the courts if, as the heritage foundation are allowed to continue this witch hunt on behalf of the British press, can we please have access to their immigration paperwork and that if Melania trump and her family.

      • @Mary Pester. Fortunately or unfortunately in this case you are allowed to do this in America.DHS denied Heritage the info so now they unfortunately can now go to court to try and get it. My hope is the Judge in the case says bugger off. I’m sure DHS have their ducks in a row.

      • Tay Bevens says:

        Melanie Trump is a citizen and has been for many years. She became a citizen before she got married to Trump.

    • Anita says:

      The judge appointed by Trump is dangerous. These judges are absolutely bonkers.

      • Jaded says:

        And let’s not forget Clarence Thomas’s wife Ginni has been involved with the Heritage Foundation since 2000. She’s made a sh*t ton of money there, close to $700K, which old Clarence conveniently neglected to file on his financial statements. She was very involved with the Jan. 6th insurrection, so I imagine she’s pushing this nonsense with all her right wing might.

    • ELX says:

      Let’s call this nonsense what it is—a coordinated campaign of harassment. Harry’s is IR1–not complex at all, he’s married to an AmCit, basically he gets a green card. On his application, there is basic but highly personal information that is no one’s business—certainly not these nutballs. This is about trying to smear him and coerce he and his wife to play ball with the Murdoch-Harmsworth press.

  2. Jais says:

    Do they really think they’re doing something here? Guess it’s providing content and clicks. Desperados

    • Moxylady says:

      They really think they are. Prince of wine something something blah blah AMERICA BALD EAGLES FREEDOM I GET ACCESS TO ALL YOUR PRIVATE INFORMATION BECAUSE I WANT IT.
      we should find out who heads up this crap ass foundation and start submitting FOIA’s surrounding everything about their lives.

      • Yvette says:

        @Moxylady … Nile Gardiner is British and is also a former Aide to Margaret Thatcher. He seems to have a BIG agenda with this nonsense and a serious tie to The Telegraph.

    • Dee(2) says:

      They don’t think he lied, they are hoping that there’s information that they can get so that they can mine it for stories. They don’t have anything new, they’re at the point where they’re writing stories about the stories that they wrote a few years ago. If the media there were really interested in the truth The first thing that they would do would be look at the visa application to clarify whether or not it says have you ever taken drugs or have you ever been convicted of a crime. The answer there would completely eliminate this entire thing. Like everything else I think they’re multiple threads at play here, they want him back in the UK for leaks, they want to punish him for leaving and suing them, and they are bitter that he chose his family over staying and being abused.

  3. Barbara says:

    Some days I get so frustrated and angry that these cretins refuse to just leave Harry and Meghan alone.

  4. girl_ninja says:

    These people need to be stopped and they need to leave Meghan and Harry alone. This is some bullshit and isn’t right at all.

    The core of this weird and creepy attack is all because Harry left his country for the safety of his family, for his black wife. That is the driver. Period.

  5. SURE says:

    I’m inclined to believe that the HF/BM’s objective in pursuing this action is to tarnish H’s reputation by reminding the public of his drug use.

    • Moxylady says:

      Honest question
      Do people give a shit about youthful drug experimentation?
      Half the USA has legalized marijuana. I was once offered cocaine in a public bathroom while washing my hands.
      He’s hanging out with terribly wealthy terrible bored peers. Of course drugs are going to be involved.

      • SURE says:

        From my experience, implying someone was a “druggie” still evokes negative connotations.

      • Snuffles says:

        No, the majority of Americans couldn’t give a flip about him smoking pot or his experimental drug use during his traumatic youth.

      • Angie says:

        No. We in America don’t care. We have more serious issues to worry about. As I have said before we don’t talk about Harry and Meghan 24/7. Harry and Meghan can turn on the news and not see or hear about themselves unlike the UK. It’s hard for people in the UK to understand that our local and national newspapers are not like your tabloids and your national newspapers which are becoming like your tabloids. We laugh at your national newspapers going on and on about Harry and Meghan. Thank God Harry left. I am sure they both get up in the morning breathing a sigh of relief not to see themselves on the news.

    • Dee(2) says:

      I’m not sure how that would be effective. He’s admitted to it in his best selling book and it was all over the news when he was a teen. Plus I think that this is fundamentally the British media not understanding attitudes towards drug use in the US. They’re going on and on about him admitting to smoking marijuana in a country where it’s legal in about 30 states, the average person is not going to care that Harry smokes a little weed and that in his twenties dealing with trauma he drank too much and tried cocaine. I could point to about 10 people I work with right now that could say the same thing.
      ETA- I think this absolutely will be dismissed as well, but it’s good to get this all in the air because they’re really trying to make it seem like the Biden administration is doing something shady. Instead of it just being this is a private citizen that you don’t have any right to their immigration records.

      • Renae says:

        When Harry moved to the US, Trump was president.

      • Dee(2) says:

        @renae but the media is trying to frame it as the Biden administrations’ DHS wouldn’t give them what they needed because of their “relationship” with Harry and Meghan.

      • Monica Bilongame says:

        You could probably point to several dozen MPs who use cocaine regularly in the HoC too !

    • Amy Bee says:

      No, they want Harry back in the UK.

  6. OriginalLeigh says:

    I would say that they should be ashamed of themselves for harassing an already overburdened government agency to get more fake tabloid fodder but I know they have no shame…

  7. HeyKay says:

    Ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.

  8. Moxylady says:

    This is insane. People’s curiosity and obsession with a celebrity does not mean that there is sufficient public interest for his private information to be released to said witch hunting public.
    Curiosity and obsession do not a legal case make.
    Also – a rich white man with world wide connections working multiple jobs in America and heading multiple projects in the USA and paying taxes on them – that’s not a hard visa to say yes to.
    “Oh you are going to be creating jobs, paying taxes and doing high profile volunteer work? Oh but you did cocaine once in your teens. Hmmmm. Tough one”.
    Our celebrities have almost all done drugs.
    Our top business leaders – same.
    Our top politicians- same.
    Stop using the courts to harass a private citizen for your own disgusting agenda.

  9. TheWigletOfWails says:

    This case is going to be dismissed with prejudice. And heritage should honestly be fined for wasting both the government and the court’s time.

    • Couch Potato says:

      I hope so. Maybe I missed it, but I’ve never heard they wanted access to Melania Trump’s visa, or her parents. Neither when her husband was running for president, or was president, but it doesn’t matter when it’s someone with the same political view.

      • ML says:

        The FBI also investigated Ivana (naturalized US Czech citizen), because they found her suspicious. And Melania’s parents’ being in the US also seems mighty suspicious. But sure, let’s go after Harry who used drugs as a teenager. I hope they toss this case.

  10. DrinkerOfTea says:

    I honestly think this will be dismissed – I can’t see where the Heritage Foundation has standing.

    • Barb Mill says:

      The Heritage Foundation is in the business of getting conservatives appointed as judges. They have shaped the current Supreme Court and many of the federal court justices. They actually have more power than most people realize.

  11. JMmoney says:

    They’re killing two birds with one stone: finding ways to keep Harry in the headlines so ppl are sick to death about hearing from him while also harassing him to the point so that he can’t work and will have no choice but to come crawling back penniless/in debt to the UK.

    Harry suing Murdoch notably The Sun was viewed as an attack on all of the British tabloids and they are taking it personally bc if one falls the others will follow. His family would never have dared to sue Murdoch (hence the discreet settlement) and have basically given the papers carte Blanche to go after H&M so long as they get some modicum of privacy and good press.

    One thing Harry forgets is that Diana did play the game by calling the British paps herself and was in the good books of certain Royal Rota for access. Without it I don’t think she would’ve gotten her side out. The media oligarchs combined have more money than Harry so I wish Harry luck.

    • Julia says:

      So you think that Harry has forgotten this information about his own mother? I highly doubt it! Let’s not infantilise Harry. He has shown great bravery pursuing these cases against the torrent of abuse he and Meghan face. I’m pretty sure he has weighed up the risks and decided it is worth it or he would have settled a long time ago.

    • Interested Gawker says:

      I believe Harry hasn’t forgotten his mother’s active relationship with the press. I think he has it that front of mind at all times. Just mentioning the party she attended for the tabloids in a quid pro quo to keep a different story out of the papers during the Oprah interview showed this- HE LIVED IT both as Diana’s child and Camilla’s red headed stepchild. Saying he won’t play the game that killed his mother is based on far more information than we even know. Diana played that game to the best of her ability and the Firm was resentful over it. They were actively trying to make the public believe she was crazy. Harry knows exactly what the stakes are (and I suspect the text H&M showed him receiving from William in the Netflix documentary eluded to aspects of this).

    • Kingston says:


      Lets understand our concepts clearly, shall we:

      “playing the britshidtmedia game” and “using communications tools to get your message to its intended audiences, of which the media are one example of said communications tools,” are 2 distinct and different activities.

      The first benefits only the criminals masquerading as journalists in the infamous and notoriously corrupt britshidtmedia.

      The second, when it is well executed, has a mutually beneficial outcome.

      Princess Di sought always to do the latter. The criminals with press passes in the britshidtmedia insisted in doing the former.

    • Kathleen says:

      If, as the rumour has it that Diana called the tabloids, remember that was more than 25years ago when the tabloids were a little less putrid than they are now. Diana did not have the advantage of social media to get her side of the story out; Harry does. He does not need the rota to get speak for him.

  12. Irene says:

    These are the worst stalker exes ever.

    Also, I hate the assumption that if Harry is by some slim chance ‘deported’ from the US (which I highly doubt and hope not), that he has no choice but to go back to the UK. He and his family, I am of no doubt, would be welcomed in many countries and should never go back to the UK except for funerals.

    • Shoshone says:

      If Harry were to be ‘deported’ then he would have great difficulty re-entering the USA in the future. This may be about Charles and William being jealous and endeavoring to “claim” the USA for themselves.

      • L4Frimaire says:

        He is not getting deported. You have to be convicted of a serious crime like murder or have multiple felonies to be deported. This whole issue isn’t a real thing. So many frivolous lawsuits and inquiries into the private lives of public or famous people are brought before courts everyday. This is tabloid fodder and another way to harass Harry since they have no access to him.

  13. Feeshalori says:

    This idiot does not speak for all Americans in his high-handed zeal to uncover private documents for his purposes and the British media, not America’s. This has overstepped all boundaries of invasion of privacy and harassment. This is despicable, and needs to be shut down immediately.

  14. aquarius64 says:

    Timing is suspect. Harry is due to testify in the UK on the phone hacking case on June 6 and 7. Having a Trump appointed judge is a worry but it’s no guarantee it will rule in HF’s favor. The court hearing is a way to get US media to report on it.

    • KFG says:

      Even a trump appointed judge isn’t stupid enough to grant this. It would set the precedent that any group can FOIA a celebrity or public figures private applications, which includes Melania, her parents, Ted Cruz, his parents, the medical records of every senator, scotus and house member. It’s not a slippery slope, it’s changing fundamental right to privacy.

  15. Amy Bee says:

    The British press want Harry back in the UK and away from his wife and children at all costs and they using the Heritage Foundation to do it. It would be interesting to find out how much the British press is paying the Heritage Foundation.

    • Lady D says:

      I’d be willing to bet they want Meghan just as much or more. They can say things about her that they would never dare say about Harry.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Can’t help but notice how the HF keeps using the phrase, ‘the Biden administration’, trying to link the president to some despicable, nefarious act—except it isn’t a despicable, nefarious act, it’s NOT in the public interest to see Harry’s visa application. I’m surprised they got a hearing. Truly surprised! I’ve requested a hearing in an EEO complaint & have been waiting six months now! And by ‘I’, I mean my lawyers. No way I’m negotiating this on my own.

  16. Jeanette says:

    They need to be penalized for gumming up the court system with frivolous lawsuits.

    I’m offended my tax dollars have to go to defending this frivolity for the sake of British media.

    The American people are not up in arms over Harry. For nothing else we deserved to see Melania’s.

  17. abby says:

    This is beyond weird. Why are they so obsessed with him? He’s not even active in American politics.

  18. Aurora says:

    Let’s say they somehow succeeded in getting Harry booted from the US. Why do they think he’d go back to the UK? I think there are any number of countries that can provide refuge for the Sussexes.

  19. Nic919 says:

    This is a frivolous claim and if it wasn’t a trump appointed judge then it would be summarily dismissed. Perhaps this judge may have some sense but that’s really the wild card here.

    • Dee(2) says:

      I actually don’t think that. There have been numerous cases where people have assumed that the Trump appointed judge would rule one way about things way more serious than this and they didn’t, including the recent Mar-A-Lago documents case for Trump himself. I think that they’re crossing their tees and dotting their I’s that everything was above board. Now I could be wrong, but I think it’s more about you’re absolutely allowed to challenge their decision and we will let you and then get it settled as a matter of case law why this is nonsensical.

      • Nic919 says:

        A lot of the trump judges would never have been appointed under any other president because they are poorly rated by the ABA and basically ideologues. I don’t know enough about this judge to know either way.

        And the judge in Florida inserted herself in the Mar a lago documents case in a way that she should not have done as it was not a civil matter and should have been rejected from the outset based on basic legal principles. It took a few appeals for the judge to realize she had to restrict her involvement.

        Anyone can bring an application, but the decision will tell us how this judge rolls.

      • Dee(2) says:

        Not disagreeing there but there’s no real grey area here, and it would open up legal precedent for conservatives in a way that they would not want. If they establish case law for this what would stop Marc Elias’ group from doing the same? Other than that he’s not a ridiculous troll. I think if there’s one thing we can rely on is conservative self-interest.

    • Fifty-50 says:

      I read the briefs filed— turns out that not only did the Heritage Foundation file a complaint (and amended complaint) but they filed a preliminary injunction to try to expedite it. The hearing is for the PI. So as a matter of judicial procedure, it has to be briefed— the judge may very well deny the PI and vacate the hearing.

      I find the timing suspect— I think they’re trying to keep Harry from leaving the US for the hearing in the UK or re-entering after the hearing. There is no other reason for them to claim “irreparable harm” if their PI isn’t granted.

      • Fifty-50 says:

        Also Heritage Foundation filed their Motion for Preliminary Injunction on May 10. The judge ordered parties to write a joint status report addressing whether a hearing was even necessary to decide the motion; it seems Heritage Foundation pushed for it. That the judge hasn’t issued a PI immediately and decided to hold the hearing nearly a month later seems to indicate exactly what he thinks of this PI. In a real emergency, if plaintiffs sufficiently demonstrated the need to expedite their request, the PI would have been issued without briefing.

        The fact that HF not only demanded a hearing, but that they demanded it to be before June 9, I think says everything about Heritage Foundation’s true motives.

      • Dee(2) says:

        That’s even more ridiculous if that’s the case. They’re saying that DHS did something wrong, it’s attorneys representing DHS that will be at the hearing not Harry how would that stop him from leaving the country? It’s not like he’s under arrest, he can leave whenever he wants. It’s like they just fundamentally don’t even understand how the law works.

    • Kingston says:

      It would be a fantastic and hilarious in-your-face, self-own to the heritage foundation and the britshidtmedia thats bankrolling this wicth-hunt, especially for that weasel gardiner, if the very drumf-appointed judge who is supposedly overseeing this hearing, was not only a veteran but a beneficiary of Harry’s Invictus Games (i:e any member of his family/relatives).

  20. Sue E Generis says:

    The judge was appointed by Trump, there is zero guarantee the judge will follow the law.

  21. Bex says:

    It’s interesting how they point out the judge is a Trump appointee, but then fail to mention how Harry’s visa application would have been approved under the Trump administration, since Harry arrived in the US a full year before Biden was sworn in as president on January 20, 2021.

    Ultimately, this isn’t going the way they want, and they already know that. What will be telling is the arguments the Heritage Foundation tries to make on behalf of foreign agents (since those aren’t US newspapers involved in this silly lawsuit), and how that will play in an American court.

  22. HeyKay says:

    Wasting the courts time.
    Harassment of Harry.
    Click bait and PR for THF, who ever heard of them before they started this foolishness?

    The courts should toss this out and fine THF.

    US has plenty of problems to fix.
    Harry isn’t a problem.

  23. Jay says:

    This is so clearly a fishing expedition, and I hope the fact that the heritage foundation has already been denied an expedited ruling on this because they are “niche” (😂) will mean that their request is denied for lack of standing. They can go kick rocks.

  24. Chantal says:

    Of course the judge is a 45 appointee…

    These people are idiots. The optics alone of deporting the son of the king/head of state of a friendly country the U.S. has trade deals with are terrible. Suing the U.S. GOVT over this issue is stupid. The govt doesn’t like to be bullied and could tie this bs up in the appeals courts for years, with records under seal so no mining future tabloid stories from that – and not every judge in the appeals process will be a 45 appointee. I’d be p*ssed if my tax dollars had to be used for this nonsense. Although it would be hilarious if the U.S. govt countersued for harassment: “Your honor, the HF has been relentlessly harassing and trying to coerce the govt into doing it’s bidding. We’d like to know what or who is funding this unprecedented attack on our country and what confidential info are they really after?”

    Plus, they’re going up against the Dept of Homeland Security, the govt agency whose secrets have secrets so…

  25. Mary S says:

    Every famous Brit in the USA should be interested in the outcome of this lawsuit. Many have moved to the USA to get away from the BM’s hunt of celebrities for sport. If the Heritage Foundation is successful. How long will it take before Adele and any other “woke” Brit celebrity finds British media requesting and mining private information in their USA visa applications for salacious articles?

  26. Lily says:

    There is zero precedent for a a visa application to be subject to a FOIA request. They are not documents subject to FOIA. And if Ozzy Osborne and John Lennon can get green cards, Harry certainly can.

  27. Tessa says:

    So they expect harry to go back to the UK leaving his family. Awful people.

  28. Flower says:

    I think this is what is really driving those divorce and separation rumours.

    These idiots want to use those rumours in a court proceeding, so that they become canonised as more than just tabloid rumours in the history books.

    So many dirty games being played around this young families lives and everyone trying to take them to court for nonsense complaints, at some point a judge needs to step in and make an example of someone, starting with Scammy.

    • Snuffles says:

      Why on earth would that be brought up in a court proceeding?

      • Flower says:

        I’m not saying they would but clearly this is what these loons are pushing for.

        We don’t know the details of Harry’s Visa but if there is a spousal element, maybe they feel it’s relevant.

        Who knows how these loons operate logic wise, but I find it odd that these rumours are starting to circulate at this time.

      • Snuffles says:


        The rumors aren’t odd, they’ve been speculating they would separate since the moment they got together.

  29. My family and I are going to visit the UK as first timers this December. But because the Royal family and the British media harass and bully Meghan and Harry non-stop I have changed our Christmas vacation plans and moved it to Paris. I don’t want a single penny of my money go to feed the members of that evil family and British media .

  30. Kirsten says:

    Genuine question: I know he’d have money from book sales + things he’s done in the last couple of years, but IS Harry wealthy? Does he have his own money from anything, or is there just sort of general royal wealth? I honestly have no idea how the Crown’s finances work for any of these people.

    • Snuffles says:

      Harry stated himself that he he still had his inheritance from Diana, which by all accounts he never touched. So, he inherited roughly $15 million in 1997 which was probably invested and accrued interest over 20+ years, so that money probably at LEAST doubled.

      Add to that his military salary. I’m going to guess he rarely spent that money either. He probably lived off of his meager allowance from Charles and had free room and board his whole life. Harry clearly wasn’t ballin’ judging by his ghetto Knot Cott living. He probably had a lot of money saved.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Snuffles, let’s not forget his salary with BetterUp and proceeds from his book sales. I think he said the advance would go to charities (or a portion thereof) but he never said anything about money made after that. He’s still making money from book sales. Harry’s got PLENTY of money of his own.

      • Lizzie says:

        Did the Queen Mum leave money to Harry? I read one time she left him much more than William knowing that the heir would come into a lot of money. But it was gossip so I don’t really know.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Lizzie, I think Harry is on record that the Queen Mum did NOT leave him anything.

      • Deering24 says:

        I would imagine Harry is extremely well-invested–if not before he met Meghan, certainly after.

      • Caroline M. says:

        Just for the record, Knottingham Cottage was hardly ghetto. If the Crown were to rent it out, they could probably get upwards of £10,000/month for it. Maybe more.
        I know that compared to William’s accommodations it might have seemed inadequate, but for the average Londoner, Knot Cot would be a dream.

  31. MSTJ says:

    This is all a distraction by the British tabloid media to take the public’s focus away from Harry’s lawsuits against the British tabloids. Next week he will be testifying in court in London against the Mirror Group tabloid newspapers and his testimony is expected to be globally covered in the news.

    I also think they’re also a demonstrating to Harry of the reach of their tentacles across the pond; maybe to intimidate him in some way. They are desperately unhinged at this point. The way they’ve ramped up their pursuit of the Sussexes has me thinking they are very concerned about Harry’s upcoming testimony. Harry is however holding firm in his crusade against the tabloid media racket with a goal to improve the media in the UK and his wife supports him on his mission. Love wins.

    I pray for the Sussex’s continued mental and physical well-being, success in their ventures and financial independence.

    • Snuffles says:

      The only thing they are demonstrating is how completely unhinged they are. They are not showing any power, this is America, literally anyone can file a lawsuit, no special powers needed.

  32. Nef05 says:

    State issues visas. The fact that DHS is defending this tells me they’re after his green card application. There is no did you do drugs question. There is a did you commit, attempt to commit a crime for which you were not arrested question. That’s the one they’re trying to get.

    Now, if he hasn’t had his interview, he can clear it up during his interview. It’s a simple process. He would not be barred. A bar requires a conviction or a credible trafficking charge. He has neither. This is a fishing expedition for BM headlines.

    • Well Wisher says:

      Excellent point.
      It is up to California.
      Two words – Ozzy Osbourne.

      • Antonym says:

        Not California. Immigration is a federal issue, and is not up to an individual member state. In this context “state” means nation-state. The US use of state often refers to one of the 50 states, but it doesn’t always. This is one of those cases where it takes the more common (outside the US) meaning of nation-state.

      • Antonym says:

        It is not up to California. Immigration is a federal issue. In this context “state” means the more common (outside of the US) nation-state. Neither California nor any other individual US state can decide matters of immigration, that is reserved for the federal government (or nation-state).

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Right @Antonym. It sounds like some have interpreted Department of State/State Department being an individual state. The Department of State/State Department is an executive department of the federal government.


  33. QuiteContrary says:

    This reeks of desperation.

  34. Well Wisher says:

    Due to his marriage to an American citizen, Prince Harry is a potential American….

    • Nef05 says:

      Harry’s not looking to become a USC. That would require giving up his UK citizenship & his title. He can, however, become a permanent legal resident (green card holder) which doesn’t require him to give up either.

      They want to invalidate his green card application by saying he lied when he signed it, assuming he said no to one specific question. The problem for them is, Harry can change his “no” answer in his interview & it’s no harm, no foul.

      It’s done everyday & is basically considered nothing more than a typo. It’s not any kind of “special privilege”. They’re looking for headlines & if they can try to blame it on the Biden admin as some special privilege, it’s a 2 birds 1 stone situation for Heritage.

      • Well Wisher says:

        Without being specific it is not whether he want to or not; it is what he is entitled to – by law with its specificifications.

      • Antonym says:

        Marriage to a US citizen does not automatically entitle you to US citizenship, you still have to go through an application process.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Nef05, this has been discussed in a previous post (yesterday?). Harry can have dual citizenship without giving up UK citizenship. He does not have to give up his titles–no one can find anything in the laws/rules about that. These are obviously talking points that someone wants out there. It’s just disinformation.

      • Antonym says:

        No doubt there are talking points at play, but people may find them believable because they vaguely recall something similar from grade school civics.

        Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution prevents the US from issuing titles and prevents office-holders from accepting titles. It goes back to the nature of the country’s founding being driven by a divorce from royalty. But the Constitution does not prohibit citizens (or legal residents) from accepting or holding titles of nobility. So, while it sounds familiar, and therefore believable, it is false. But that believability makes it dangerous.

        The text: “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

  35. j.ferber says:

    Harry looks yummy in both his polo pony pics! Yes.

  36. tamsin says:

    So are they trying to prevent Harry from re-entering the US after he goes to UK for his court case?

    • Polo says:

      No they aren’t…this has been going on for over a month and he’s been back and forth in that time.
      This is just a fishing expedition for a story specially for the Telegraph and British media.
      Again it’s pointless and it’s not going anywhere and that’s why most US media is ignoring it.
      They won’t prevent anything.

      • Fifty-50 says:

        The idea is that if granted the PI, Heritage Foundation would get Harry’s info on an expedited basis and then raise a stink. They don’t have the info yet. If the judge orders the info to be turned over immediately, HF would be able to make headlines and try to put public pressure on him not being allowed entry to the US. (Judge doesn’t need to order DHS to turn the info over immediately— if they even have it— he could do like a “within 10 days” sort of deal.)

  37. Lizzie says:

    I don’t know anything about immigration law, however Harry’s lawyers do and they also were aware of every word of Spare. There won’t be a conflict of information.

  38. Fátima says:

    This foundation’s allegations (which strike me as quite unoccupied) remind me a lot of Samantha Markle’s allegations ie stupid, nonsensical and attention seeking.

  39. Anna says:

    It’s so weird to me that there is some expectation here that people would be able to arbitrarily FOIA someone’s visa application without their consent. There are privacy provisions… in theory they are in place to prevent the government from sharing our personal details with any loser who requests them. You know, to protect us from nefarious actors who want to do harm with that kind of info.

    I would expect the privacy provisions to carry a heavier weight in the decision of whether or not to release the information than any idea of “investigating” government wrong-doing in the processing of one specific person’s visa application.

    That is to say — When it comes to Harry’s visa application process, I don’t know where the line is drawn on what is a “personal/private” document vs a procedural document relating to the application and approval process that could be open to public scrutiny (if such a thing even exists)… but surely his actual application would fall squarely in the “personal information” space.

  40. Cassie says:

    They must be getting worried about Harry’s court appearance next week.

    Stay safe Harry .

  41. blunt talker says:

    This is a disgusting ploy to harm Harry and Meghan and to put pressure on Harry when he testifies in the Uk-this would set a precendent for all other citizens living and working in the America-I need to look at Melania Trump-Ozzy Obsbourne-the Rolling Stones-any British citizen who has known drug problems whether here or overseas-this would open up a can of worms the USA doesn’t need-if Harry has not committed a crime on US soil-He is paying his taxes here-he is working to provide for his family-let’s be very clear Harry lives in California where weed is legal in a certain amount-this is a pressure tactic for the culture wars.

  42. AC says:

    I’m learning a little more of the Heritage Foundation which is GOP affiliate and influences public policy in the US. To me it’s weird how someone who is a British citizen is one of the Directors of an organization that’s influencing public policy in the US.
    And they’re suing a US govt agency. Are they trying to cause another revolutionary war.
    A variety of commenters have mentioned in previous posts how the BP are literally trying to snake their way into all Aspects Of the US media. And now this, interfering in our own public policy. It just feels they desperately want to latch onto the power they had on their former colonies. Our founding fathers are literally rolling in their graves .
    There’s no US public interest on this. It’s such a waste of time as Americans have other valid immigration concerns they care more about. And this is hardly breaking news. Harry pays his taxes, he’s not breaking any laws, and his and Meghan’s organization here in the US employs Americans . I don’t really see this going anywhere fighting a legitimate US govt agency which they shouldn’t be interfering.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      There just seems to be something very nefarious about this whole Heritage Foundation business. I wondered why a supposed ‘American think tank’ would have a Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom.

      This is an interesting article from 2017. The ties between UK government/MP’s and the Heritage Foundation.

      It would really be a shame if some old university mate(or anyone for the matter) could produce a photo of Gardiner doing blow or toking up and see how he’d like his visa app to be reviewed. /s

  43. Kathleen says:

    If, as the rumour has it that Diana called the tabloids, remember that was more than 25years ago when the tabloids were a little less putrid than they are now. Diana did not have the advantage of social media to get her side of the story out; Harry does. He does not need the rota to get speak for him.