The US government was last night called “outrageous” for refusing to reveal details of Prince Harry’s American visa application – saying he has a “right to privacy”.
Campaign group Heritage Foundation’s attempt to find out if he lied about his drug use was denied for the second time.
Immigration authorities claimed the prince, who wrote a memoir and directed a six-part Netflix series about his life, has a “right to privacy”.
But a US think tank seeking the material claimed the refusal was just a delaying tactic and the idea that they were playing games was “outrageous”.
The Heritage Foundation is requesting that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) release the documents under US Freedom of Information laws.
It has been claimed that Harry may have lied on his immigration papers about drug use, despite admitting to using drugs in his memoir and on the Netflix show.
If the prince didn’t tell the truth on his immigration forms, he could be expelled from the United States.
DHS initially denied the request, and the Heritage Foundation filed a lawsuit in a Washington court to overturn that decision.
The letter said that the US claim that the Heritage Foundation points were only “inflammatory allegations” was merely “an attempt to detract from the files”.
The notion that she acted improperly in court was “outrageous,” the foundation said.
The letter said the foundation wanted a quick decision on whether to proceed with the case, but accused the US of “hesitating” behavior
Instead, it has reluctantly agreed to a longer timeline, with filing by November and a judge’s ruling thereafter.
In its second denial, DHS confirmed for the first time that “entry and exit paperwork” existed for Harry, but declined to elaborate.
The ministry said that even if Harry is a “public figure”, it does not mean that he “would lose all rights to privacy”.
It said: “Providing the Duke’s entry and exit documents would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.”
DHS said it would only release the material if there was clear evidence of “government impropriety” and not, as claimed, “a mere suspicion of wrongdoing”.
DHS said: “Information that may have subjected a traveler to additional scrutiny at one point may be deemed untimely and irrelevant at a later point in time.”
“In light of these facts, an individual’s entry and exit dates to the CBP, even those of a famous person, are not sufficient evidence to undermine public confidence in the CBP and its application of equal justice under the law.”
The freedom of information request was submitted by Nile Gardiner, director of the foundation’s Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom.
Immigration experts said Harry’s admissions could result in a border agent refusing him entry into the United States.
Harry declined to comment on the case.