Biden administration rejects latest bid to release Prince Harry's visa records due to ambassador's 'extraordinary' comment that Joe will never deport the Duke

The rejection of the claim to release Prince Harry's U.S. visa records by Joe Biden's administration reflects a stance of maintaining confidentiality and privacy regarding individuals' immigration documentation. The comments made by Ambassador Jane Hartley regarding Harry's status in the U.S. under the Biden administration may have raised questions about his immigration status, leading to the request for access to his records.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex in Florida at the 2024 Royal Salute Polo Challenge to Benefit Sentebale, on April 12, 2024

The Heritage Foundation's lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act underscores the ongoing debate surrounding transparency and access to government records. While the Foundation seeks access to Harry's immigration papers, the administration's decision to reject the claim suggests a commitment to upholding privacy rights and maintaining the confidentiality of individuals' immigration records.

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex competes during the Royal Salute Polo Challenge benefitting Sentebale at Grand Champions Polo Club on April 12, 2024 in Wellington, Florida

The legal argument presented by the Heritage Foundation, suggesting that Ambassador Jane Hartley's comments undermine the Biden administration's stance on keeping Prince Harry's immigration documents confidential, adds an interesting dimension to the case. By asserting that Hartley's remarks support the case for disclosing the documents, the Foundation aims to leverage the ambassador's statements to bolster its position.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex kiss as she presents his polo team with the trophy for winning the 2024 Royal Salute Polo Challenge to Benefit Sentebale, Friday, April 12, 2024

This legal salvo highlights the intricacies of legal interpretation and strategy, where statements made by government officials can be used to support or challenge arguments in legal proceedings. The Foundation's assertion suggests that Hartley's comments may have inadvertently weakened the administration's position on keeping the documents secret.

As the case unfolds, it will be interesting to see how the courts weigh the arguments presented by both parties and determine the outcome regarding the disclosure of Prince Harry's immigration records.

The response from the lawyers for the Department of Homeland Security presents a counterargument to the Heritage Foundation's claim regarding Ambassador Jane Hartley's comments about Prince Harry's immigration status. They assert that Hartley's remarks were merely a reaction to previous statements made by former President Donald Trump regarding the possibility of deporting Harry if he were to be re-elected.

The government lawyers maintain that Hartley's comments did not disclose any private information about Harry's immigration status. Furthermore, they reject the idea that Hartley definitively ruled out deportation for Harry regardless of future circumstances.

By framing Hartley's comments as a reaction to Trump's statements rather than as an indication of Harry's actual immigration status, the Department of Homeland Security seeks to downplay the significance of Hartley's remarks in the context of the lawsuit. This response underscores the legal intricacies involved in interpreting statements made by public officials and their potential implications in legal proceedings.

US Ambassador Jane Hartley laughed off the suggestion Harry could be deported, telling Sky News: 'It's not gonna happen in the Biden administration'

The response from the Department of Homeland Security continues to assert that Ambassador Jane Hartley's comments did not disclose any non-public information regarding Prince Harry's immigration status. They emphasize that her remarks about Harry not being deported under the Biden administration were in line with the administration's position in the ongoing litigation.

Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, watches the prize ceremony at the 2024 Royal Salute Polo Challenge to Benefit Sentebale, Friday, April 12, 2024, in Wellington, Florida

Furthermore, the response suggests that Hartley's comments align with the view that there were no irregularities in Harry's admission to and residence in the United States. This stance reinforces the government's position that there is no basis for releasing Harry's visa records.

The Heritage Foundation's interest in Harry's visa records, particularly regarding whether he disclosed drug use on his application and if he received any special treatment from immigration authorities, underscores the Foundation's quest for transparency and accountability in government procedures. This aspect of the case highlights the broader implications of the lawsuit beyond the specific circumstances surrounding Prince Harry's immigration records.

District Judge Carl Nichols who is presiding over the case in Washington D.C.

The disclosure of Prince Harry's past drug use in his memoir "Spare" raises questions about whether he accurately disclosed this history on his U.S. visa application, as applicants are required to disclose any history of drug use, which can impact their application.

SPARE, the memoir of Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, was published globally on January 10, 2023

The Heritage Foundation's argument, based on Ambassador Jane Hartley's comments, suggests that her remarks provided insight into Prince Harry's current and future immigration status, contrary to the Biden administration's previous assertions that such information could not be released without revealing his immigration status.

This development adds a new layer of complexity to the ongoing legal dispute over the release of Prince Harry's visa records. The Foundation's contention that Hartley's comments constitute a revelation about Harry's immigration status could potentially influence the court's decision on whether to release the requested documents.

The Heritage Foundation's argument that Ambassador Jane Hartley's comments undermine the Biden administration's position on keeping Prince Harry's immigration information confidential is reinforced by former President Donald Trump's recent remarks. Trump's suggestion that he would take "appropriate action" if Harry was found to have lied on his visa application about drug use, including the possibility of deportation, contradicts the administration's stance.

In a recent interview for GB News with Nigel Farage, Donald Trump said Harry should not get 'special privileges'

Ambassador Hartley's response, stating that deportation "is not going to happen in the Biden administration," directly addresses Trump's comments and implies a level of assurance regarding Harry's immigration status under the current administration. This statement further highlights the potential significance of Hartley's remarks in shaping public perception and legal arguments surrounding the release of Harry's visa records.

Former President Donald Trump speaks to Nigel Farage on GB News

The interplay between political statements, legal arguments, and public discourse underscores the complexity of the case and its broader implications for transparency, privacy, and government accountability. As the legal proceedings unfold, the court will likely consider these various factors in determining whether to grant the Heritage Foundation's request for access to Prince Harry's immigration documents.