Newly uncovered court documents suggest that the Duke of Sussex could face social disgrace if his U.S. immigration records are revealed to the public.
The legal team representing the American government contends that certain law enforcement details in the Duke’s visa application should remain confidential due to the negative associations that could arise from their exposure.
A comprehensive 53-page court transcript outlining this argument was slated for release this past Saturday.
The push for disclosure of the Duke of Sussex’s March 2020 visa application data stemmed from a conservative think tank during a hearing in February, particularly focusing on his responses regarding drug use.
As per the court transcript, attorneys from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) argued in favor of sealing the Duke’s visa documents to safeguard his right to privacy.
During the court proceedings, DHS lawyer John Bardo emphasized the inclusion of sensitive law enforcement information in the records, underscoring the need for confidentiality.
Interestingly, prior coverage of the Duke’s visa situation did not touch upon any mention of law enforcement records.
An immigration attorney based in Los Angeles highlighted the broad scope of what law enforcement records could encompass, ranging from local police and the FBI to airport security and even military police.
Despite this, the specific nature of the data in question remains ambiguous, leaving room for speculation and curiosity.
The term “stigma” notably stands out in this context, as it is not commonly associated with standard visa applications.
Its presence raises questions about the potential factors that could lead to the stigmatization of the Duke’s application.
The mystery surrounding the contents of the records fuels intrigue, with observers left to ponder until the documents are eventually unveiled to the public.
In a bid to obtain comprehensive information about the Duke’s entry and residency in the U.S., the Heritage Foundation, a Republican Policy Institute, is taking legal action against the DHS.
One pivotal query that visa applicants must address is whether they have a history of drug abuse or addiction, a question that the Duke reportedly answered affirmatively in his memoir, “Spare,” where he candidly discussed his use of mushrooms, marijuana, and cocaine.
Despite this disclosure, the DHS asserts that the memoir does not constitute sworn testimony or conclusive evidence.
The final decision on the accessibility of the documents is anticipated to be delivered by Judge Carl Nichols in the coming weeks following a thorough private review.