DHS told the Heritage Foundation that Prince Harry has a right to privacy

For months now, the Heritage Foundation – a neo-conservative American think-tank populated by lunatics – has been trying to force the Biden administration into publicly releasing Prince Harry’s visa application. The idiotic crux of Heritage’s argument is that Harry wrote about his drug use in Spare, so they should be allowed to go on a fishing expedition to see IF Harry lied on his visa application. They have zero evidence that Harry lied, but Heritage is in league with the British media (several members of Heritage are British) to provide outraged content attacking Harry and trying to get Harry “deported” from the US. In June, Heritage’s FOIA request was laughed out of court, but we knew it wasn’t over. These Heritage d-bags were going to continue to make asses out of themselves and they would continue to demand nuisance-hearings about Harry’s visa. So, here’s the latest.

The US Government was last night branded ‘outrageous’ for refusing to reveal details about Prince Harry’s American visa application – on the grounds he had a “right to privacy”. It came as a bid by campaign group the Heritage Foundation to uncover whether he lied about his drug use was rejected for a second time.

Immigration authorities claimed that the prince, who wrote a memoir and did a six part Netflix series about his life, had a ‘right to privacy’. But a US think tank which is seeking the material claimed that the refusal was just a delaying tactic and the idea they were playing games was ‘outrageous’.

If the prince did not tell the truth on his entry forms then he could be removed from the US. DHS initially rejected the application and the Heritage Foundation filed a lawsuit in a court in Washington to overturn that decision.

The letter said that the US’s claims that the Heritage Foundation’s points were just ‘inflammatory allegations’ was just ‘an effort to distract from the record’.

The idea that it was not acting properly in court was ‘outrageous’, the foundation said. The letter said the foundation wanted a quick decision on whether the case would proceed but accused the US of ‘dilatory’ conduct. Instead it has reluctantly agreed to a longer timetable with motions being filed until November and a judge’s decision after that.

In its second refusal, DHS confirmed for the first time that ‘entry and exit records’ for Harry do exist, though it refused to elaborate further.

The department said that even though Harry was a ‘public figure’, that does not mean that he would ‘forfeit all rights of privacy’. It said: ‘Providing the Duke’s entry and exit records would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy’. DHS said that it would only release the material if there was strong evidence of ‘government impropriety’ rather than a ‘bare suspicion of misconduct’ as was alleged.

DHS said: ‘Information that may have subjected a traveler to additional scrutiny at one time has the possibility of being considered untimely and irrelevant at a later date. Given these facts, one person’s CBP entry and exit records, even a famous person’s, is insufficient evidence to undermine public confidence in CBP and its application of equal justice under the law’.

The Freedom of Information application was filed by Nile Gardiner, director of the foundation’s Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom.

[From The Sun]

In case you missed it, this Sun exclusive was provided by the Heritage Foundation because DHS sent Heritage a letter rejecting their second FOIA request, and DHS told Heritage that what they’re trying to do is insane and a breach of privacy. Think-tanks can’t randomly decide that they have the right to see a private citizen’s visa application or their travel records, which is what DHS’s letter to Heritage says. Instead of going with the headline and story of “DHS laughs at a bonkers Nazi think-tank’s attempt to get their hands on someone’s visa records,” the Sun went with “Exclusive: ‘OUTRAGEOUS’ Fury as ‘outrageous’ US government refuses to reveal details of Prince Harry’s visa application on privacy grounds.” I did laugh at “Immigration authorities claimed that the prince, who wrote a memoir and did a six part Netflix series about his life, had a ‘right to privacy’.” LMAO!! You mean Harry can keep his American visa paperwork private even though HE WROTE A MEMOIR?!!? These people are morons.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

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

54 Responses to “DHS told the Heritage Foundation that Prince Harry has a right to privacy”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Well there you have it. He has a right to privacy like any other ordinary person. He has done nothing for them to question his application and it is outrageous to ask. Will this stop the harassment? Probably not. They will look for some other way. The tabloids and his family are insane with jealousy and want to end him like they did his mother.

    • antipodean says:

      You are so right @Susan Collins, these people are shameless in their unhinged desperation! Also, the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom will never NOT make me laugh derisively. I don’t think it denotes what they think it denotes!

    • kirk says:

      Did the Sun also disclose in its article that they have a conflict of interest since the Duke of Sussex is suing their media organization? I’m guessing that’s a no. But I won’t be clicking on the article to confirm.

  2. ThatsNotOkay says:

    It’s not the foundation’s business. If the government had suspicions and concerns about him lying and thought they might warrant deportation, they’d be on it themselves. They don’t, and aren’t.

    • Debbie says:

      That’s the thing. The Heritage Foundation has no standing and therefore no basis to request anyone’s governmental documents. If something was out of order, then DHS would look into it, not some conservative entity with British members. Until then, Heritage Foundation can just keep stewing in their own bile and stay out of the Sussexes’ business. And no, writing a book doesn’t mean that one gives up all their rights to privacy either.

  3. Z says:

    Will they ever get over the fact that Harry left? Damn it’s getting embarrassing for them now

    • BothSidesNow says:

      It actually is @ Z. They seem to have no self awareness as they continue to dig their heals into this fight that they will NEVER win!! They are simply showing how utterly unhinged and obsessed with Prince Harry they are and are willing to finance the Heritage Foundation to use a means to an end.

    • NottheOne says:

      That’s the thing – it’s not that Harry left. It’s that he’s still living and happy. They want him ground into submission.They could care less who they hurt, their need to feel superior and to “win” is all they have.

  4. Feebee says:

    I am imagining a guy sitting at his desk at DHS looking at the Heritage Foundation letter and thinking “bring it on, you muppets. We can do this all day”

    • BlueNailsBetty says:

      @Feebee All day, every day. I knew people in our government agency’s public information dept and they were hard core. They didn’t care about feelings, they cared about the law. They got paid to sit there and deny nosy mf’ers and they considered it a badge of honor when someone complained about the denial.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      Yes @ Feebee!! Let’s have the Heritage Foundation become such a vile and corrupt organization that they lose any and ALL credibility amongst the US political party!! Treat and expose them as the lepers as they are and bleed them dry into bankruptcy!!

  5. Digital Unicorn says:

    ‘Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom’ – as a Brit old enough to remember some of her policies this gives me the LOLZ all day long.

    • SarahCS says:

      She’ll always be the milk-snatcher to me.

    • Eurydice says:

      I think Gardiner actually worked for Thatcher back in the day.

      • Yvette says:

        @Eurydice … Yes, he was one of Margaret Thatcher’s aides.

      • SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

        That twerp’s time as a Margaret Thatcher aide was long after she’d retired, and it probably consisted of blotting her dribble.

    • Miranda says:

      I wasn’t even alive during the Thatcher era, but I do remember being almost in awe of the fact that there were many people openly celebrating her death, like throwing street parties and shit. I was kinda jealous because such things would be unthinkable following the death of any American leader, no matter how vile. We gave NIXON a respectful state funeral, FFS. Of course, I could see that taboo disappearing when Trump, at long last, shuffles off this mortal coil (especially in NYC).

      • BlueNailsBetty says:

        Yep. Even that mf’er Reagan got a State funeral and he should have been loaded into a trash bag and dumped in an unmarked hole.

      • QuiteContrary says:

        My husband and I went to an Elvis Costello concert in London and when he sang his song, “Tramp the Dirt Down,” the balcony (where we were sitting) shook, as people mimicked tramping down the dirt on Thatcher’s grave. (The song’s lyrics: “when they finally put you in the ground I’ll stand on your grave and tramp the dirt down.”)

        It was wild.

    • Laura-Lee MacDonald says:

      That this is a real organization, not a parody of one in a dystopian sci-fi comedy show, is damn chilling. The name is legit an oxymoron.

      • antipodean says:

        @Digital Unicorn, I wrote the exact same upthread before I saw your comment. I lived through the MT years in the UK, and it always amazes me how undeserved her good reputation in the US is in certain circles. She was Britain’s version of a female Reagan/Trump, (except for the fact that she was actually intelligent, which somehow makes her worse), and her policies were murderous and deeply harmful to so many. Maggie, Maggie, Maggie, OUT, OUT, OUT!

      • Bee says:

        I lived through the Thatcher/Reagan years in the US. Never could stand her. Even watching that section of The Crown was annoying. She will always be the evil person who took milk away from the schoolchildren and started the pointless and expensive Falkland war (among many other terrible things) to me.

  6. Miranda says:

    The irony of an ostensibly patriotic, traditionalist American think-tank, whose unhinged obsession with America’s “heritage” (a dog whistle if ever there was one) is right there in the damn name, having British members…

    • Jaded says:

      And the irony that Clarence Thomas’s wife Ginni has partnered with/worked for this so-called Think Tank (read Fascist Folly) for over 20 years boggles my mind. Dog-whistle indeed!

  7. Dee(2) says:

    This argument that because Harry has in the past chosen to share some information means that he no longer has a choice on what information is shared It’s very bizarre to me, because they don’t apply it to anyone else. They seem to have zero concept of consent. If you’ve ever said yes you can never say no again. Which shouldn’t be shocking to me that that’s the thought process that a lot of them have but it’s disgusting to see it in print.

    • girl_ninja says:

      What pathetic losers. May they stay losing in all of their endeavors.

      • 5Mary Pester says:

        @girlninja, agreed but,MAYBE we should look at the Brit members of the heritage foundations Immigration paperwork? +++their funding, bet that would all be very interesting reading and show a nice BIG paper and money trail back to the DF and the Scum

    • Snuffles says:

      They used that argument in Meghan’s lawsuit when they published her private letter and lost.

      The British tabloids fundamentally believe that anything and everything about a royals life is fair game and in the public’s interest because they are taxpayer supported. It doesn’t matter if Harry is no longer taking public money, they still believe they own him.

      • Jay says:

        Not all the royals- we don’t see them harassing anyone but Harry and Meghan, really.

      • Snuffles says:

        That’s because they cut deals to prevent it. Watch any documentary on it and the tabloid writers will admit that the palaces will trade stories to keep their principles negative stories out of the news. When they were younger Charles threw both Harry and William under the bus. Then William did the same by throwing Harry and Meghan under the bus.

      • Lady D says:

        And soon, William will be throwing his own children under a bus.

  8. Jay says:

    Bahaha, it’s so lovely to see some of the worst people not get what they want! Bless their cold little hearts but they keep trying it.

    These are the same people that are like “You don’t have a right to know about what Boris did as PM at this party in Italy that he attended alone, and William has a super mysterious press injunction, and Charles doesn’t have to disclose his wealth, and the late prince philip’s will is sealed for a hundred years, but sure – they should somehow be able to see Harry’s visa application!

  9. Eurydice says:

    The funny thing is that there’s literally no interest in the US about this. Nobody cares and it’s not in the mainstream press.

  10. ML says:

    Right, well The Sun (which doesn’t believe Harry has a right to privacy) broke the scandal of a male BBC presenter who groomed a teenager and sent that person £35 thousand. They know who this presenter is and ARE NOT PUBLISHING who he is.

  11. MsIam says:

    Welp as I saw a Republican call them on Twitter, they are a “nest of kooks”. Isn’t The Sun part of Murdoch’s stable? I can’t remember anymore, they all run together.

  12. Brassy Rebel says:

    This “Think Tank” and the British media are all insane. Rational people do not behave like this.

  13. Izzy says:

    They can keep effing around and they WILL find out. Some other group will file something equally outrageous. Melania Trump got in on a genius visa, so I think it’s only fair they finally reveal her applications. After all, she posed nude for modeling pictures, why should she expect privacy now? Personally, I would donate to any organization that did this just to needle the Heritage Foundation.

    • WiththeAmericann says:

      I am waiting for someone to file a FOIA for her visa application. And her parents.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Me as well!! How convenient for Drumpf to allow her parents, family sponsored VISA to immigrate, which Cheeto-lini immediately ceased for all other families seeking family VISA’s. He and his family of thieves and criminals make me violently ill everyday.

  14. MSTJ says:

    The British tabloids should understand that King Charles is not the monarch of the USA. Their invisible contract with the monarch does not allow them the right to demand private information from the government of the USA because they have a suspicion about what Prince Harry may have entered on a visa application. The US government is not His Majesty the King’s government, USA is not a part of the British Empire. Thousands died in a war for independence from HMTK.

    Harry chose to live in the USA 🇺🇸 with his family, away from the toxic royal institution and British tabloids. He is thriving in the US so now they want him deported to return to the toxicity? I’m sickened by the level of control these people want to exert over the life of Prince Harry and his family. He is a human being, not some animal that needs to be culled or controlled by the tabloids or the royal institution. Their continued pursuit of Harry and his family and investment in wanting them to fail so that they can be dependent on and controlled by the royal institution and tabloids is disgusting 🤮.

    However, with the court cases that Harry has in motion, I think I understand what is driving the tabloids’ frenetic agenda. Harry’s financial independence and separation from the institution allows him the power to pursue the court cases. If Harry manages to shift public sentiments about the tabloid media’s unlawful information gathering practices and the media is required to be independently regulated, the power of Murdoch and other newspaper owners have over his majesty’s government may be limited. Maybe the pseudo democracy the UK has might thrive without the media racket that currently influences and controls his majesty’s government. It will be refreshing to have proper media ethics in British reporting. That’s my hope of what can be the ultimate impact of the cases Prince Harry and the other litigants have brought against the tabloids’ unlawful information gathering practices.

  15. Chantal says:

    “Instead it has reluctantly agreed to a longer timetable with motions being filed until November, with a judge’s decision after that”…I

    Haha. The HF decided to play a stupid game with the Dept of Homeland Security so they could possibly be filing motions for decades, not just until November. And I think this article shows that the fact that DHS could tie them up in court for a long time and still not comply is slowly dawning on them. They and their BM cronies need to accept that 1) they aren’t getting those records and 2) they won’t be able to force the U.S. Govt into doing anything it doesn’t want to. They need to leave the British King’s son alone and the Tory govt should shut this bs down tout de suite. There are some agencies that you just shouldn’t p*ss off. Like the IRS, the DHS, the Dept of Justice, the state and local Dept of Motor Vehicles….

    • MsIam says:

      Someone should remind them that in the government even the lawyers have lawyers. Nothing to do but file paperwork all day long……

  16. Amy Bee says:

    The bottom-line is DHS never releases a person’s private information so the Heritage Foundation on a hiding to no where. But as long as the British press is paying them to do this nonsense they will do it.

  17. Ennie says:

    That association or whatever is either being funded by those tabloids publishing their “findings”, or they are selling them. No other explanation. One can see right there who is behind this idiocy.
    They will keep doing this forever and are probably expecting a more willing person in charge eventually.

  18. LP says:

    Yet another example of how, in ever country in the world, consent means nothing to the conservative right wing brain. They do whatever they want, of course, but they just short circuit whenever someone else does!

  19. Julianna says:

    They really are completely obsessed with Prince Harry and super angry he left. They look like complete pyschos and I’m thinking someone at DHS who has had to deal with them feels the same way…

  20. Saucy&Sassy says:

    I’ve worked with lawsuits when there’s a denial of releasing public records (retired paralegal). They can play around with the Courts if they choose to, but I don’t think the Courts are going to play around with them.

    Murdoch needs to understand that his visa application and citizenship application are also on the line here. There could be a reasonable argument to be made that his actions show that he’s working against democracy in the US. Does he really want to go there?

  21. Deering24 says:

    I’d give a billion to see the Murdoch Mafia’s citizenship records. 😈🤣

    • CrazyHeCallsMe says:

      This is such a slippery slope. There are many others (such as Elon Musk) whose records could be on the line.

  22. LadyBreenie says:

    The Heretics Foundation are crazy. Harry writing his memoirs does not mean all and sundry should know every aspect of his private life. Many other British public figures have discussed their drug use, but the Heretics aren’t asking to see their immigration info. It is so transparent and obvious that the Heretics and Murdick cronies are trying to use this as a means to get Harry deported. The DHS knows it and are sticking two fingers up at the foolishness.

  23. Jferber says:

    Let them go on a fishing expedition on Melania and her Genius Visa.

  24. Saucy&Sassy says:

    Are they talking about a case schedule when they say motions can be filed until November? That just occurred to me. If that’s the case, this is just a procedural order that is entered for all cases. That doesn’t mean they can’t get this taken care of before then.