Judge dismisses Heritage Foundation's visa lawsuit against Prince Harry

[TallerSally]

This non-story has generated incredible amounts of coverage in the Meghan & Harry hating media, and on SM, with so many folks salivating for months on end that the pair and their kids could be unceremoniously kicked out of the US and forced to beg on bended knee for the UK to take them back (as opposed to, for example, them moving to Canada or anywhere else - go figure!).

For most cooler heads however, the lawsuit was mostly baseless harassment by the far-right Heritage Foundation and their wealthy backers, and it was only a matter of time before the US courts got fed up of the rigmarole.

Well that day seems to have come:

"A lawsuit brought over Prince Harry's visa status by conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation has been terminated, Newsweek can reveal.
The Duke of Sussex wrote in his memoir, Spare, how he had taken drugs including cocaine, marijuana and magic mushrooms. Heritage filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security demanding the publication of Harry's visa documents, arguing that his use of narcotics should have barred him from living and working in America.
However, court records show that the case was terminated on September 9, when several sealed orders were filed in the case, heard in Washington D.C. before Judge Carl J. Nichols.
Little is currently known about exactly why the case was brought to an end, or whether this means Harry's visa papers will now remain a secret. If that is the outcome, it will likely bring relief for the prince as Heritage had suggested his past drug-taking could undermine his right to live in America."

These types of cases die a long death so who knows, there may be further spasms in the coming months... but those with a need to hate on Harry 24/7/365 may be wise to turn their attentions elsewhere... perhaps to his upcoming Netflix show (but wait, they're about to drop him, right???)...

LoL.

https://www.newsweek.com/prince-harry-visa-drugs-case-closed-biden-administration-heritage-1951493

I never really saw the point of that lawsuit. It's not as if the US are going to kick out the King's son whatever the result.

I do wonder if they were using Harry as a stalking horse to test out the case law because there are other people's visas they want to challenge. I don't know much about them but I suspect that losing a lot of money on legal fees couldn't happen to nicer people.

... and could this be Harry celebrating at a Montecito bookstore on Sept 6th?

"The Sept. 7 grand opening was the second night of a two-night celebration for the bookstore, owned by literary agent Jennifer Rudolph Walsh and cosmetics mogul Victoria Jackson. The night prior, Sept. 6, Meghan was joined by Prince Harry, 39, at the friends and family party, during which the Duke of Sussex pointed to his memoir, Spare, when asked if he had a book recommendation.

Both Spare and Meghan’s 2021 children’s book, The Bench, are featured in the store’s “Our Local Authors” display."

Tee-hee...

https://people.com/meghan-markle-makes-quick-exit-bookstore-event-relatable-parenting-moment-8709895

Word!!

😎

"Dismiss" is some spin. The case has terminated, as they all do, eventually. Dismiss implies it has been thrown out, which you have no evidence to support (and neither does Newsweek). There does appear to be an ex parte order that has been sealed from public view. That order could be a ruling in favour of either party. Why is it sealed? Well, it's an FOI request case and one reason for sealing it is if the judge has ruled in favour of the Heritage Foundation. An unsealed judgment would allow the Heritage Foundation to publicise Harry's visa status before the Dept of Homeland Security gets the chance to appeal (and would totally negate any appeal). So it could be a sealed ruling protecting Harry's privacy pending appeal. And yes, it could be a refusal of the FOI on grounds that relate to National Security or other matters. One thing is for sure, though, nobody knows except the judge and the parties (and the parties do not include Prince Harry), including you, OP.

Is salivating the new frothing ?

She hasn't been in a bookstore in 5 years!

What does this mean?
(as opposed to, for example, them moving to Canada or anywhere else - go figure!).

You may not like the Heritage Foundation (I don't like their politics, but they have given left wing GC women a platform when nobody else would), but the Freedom of Information Act was put in place for a reason, and it's fine for American citizens to question whether visa laws are being unevenly applied depending on the status and influence of the applicant. One of the cases cited in the Harry case is that of George Gibney, an Irish National Swim coach who fled Ireland when he was being investigated and charged with historic child SA cases (you can hear the testimony of his victims - all once promising, world class swimmers - in the BBC Sounds podcast, Where is George Gibney). A journalist FOI'd his visa application, and it transpired a powerful federation of US swim coaches lobbied for him, despite the charges he faced at home in Ireland prima facie negating his status to remain. As a parent of a competitive swimmer, I would like assurance that rules are not being bent for someone accused of such serious crimes - I wouldn't want lobbyists putting my child in danger.

While Harry is a joke figure to some, he's a well connected, political lobbying tool for others through his work (eg, with the Aspen Institute, and via Archewell and the research they do that has been used by political lobbyists/think tanks in the US, the UK and Australia), and the people he has access to. If he has a head of state visa, as has been suspected, he is in complete breach of it through this work and his other money making endeavours. Being the son of a king both means everything and nothing. If he is being treated differently due to his status, this should be transparent and reasons given for being treated like no other holder of an A1 diplomatic visa is treated. If he has an immigrant worker's visa, then he should be treated like all other workers who break the homeland security rules through drug consumption. If he is being given special pass due to status of birth, then the decision making processes behind this and similar cases should be transparent, as per the rule of law that applies in a civilised country.

Interesting how supporters of Meghan and Harry often raise the exemption of the Royal family from FOIA requests in the UK as an example of their unearned privilege and unjustified protection from public scrutiny.

But the same laws, when applied to a Roya Family member in another jurisdiction, are “baseless harassment” when Prince Harry is involved….

I don’t mind which lane you pick. But consistency would be good!