Documents in the lawsuit challenging Prince Harry’s immigration records were released Tuesday — but the heavily redacted files revealed hardly anything new about the closely watched case.
The Department of Homeland Security released court declarations from agents from last year who reviewed the Duke of Sussex’s immigration file and determined that it would violate his privacy to publicize it.
Also made public was a transcript of a closed-door hearing in the lawsuit brought by the conservative Heritage Foundation about unsealing the 40-year-old royal’s case. But the transcript, as well as the officer’s declarations, were all heavily redacted and didn’t reveal new information about Harry’s immigration case.
The former royal’s actual immigration records were not released.
The documents were made public in Washington, DC, federal court Tuesday afternoon ahead of the deadline set by Judge Carl Nichols — who last month ordered the feds to turn over redacted versions of the records.
One officer with the Freedom of Information Act & Privacy Act Unit, Jarrod Panter, wrote in an April 2024 declaration that since the duke hadn’t waived his right to privacy, the public was not entitled to his records and if they were released he might face “harm” and “harassment.”
Heritage made an initial FOIA request for the records on the grounds that Harry may have received special treatment when he was allowed into the US in 2020.
But Panter’s declaration reiterated arguments the feds have made before that everything in his case was done above board.
“The records, as explained above, do not support such an allegation but show the regulatory process involved in reviewing and granting immigration benefits which was done in compliance with the Immigration and Nationality Act … and applicable rules and regulations,” Panter said.
Nicols, the judge, said he allowed the government to “submit proposed redactions” of the filings in order for him to “analyze” whether Harry properly attested to drug use in his 2023 memoir “Spare.”
“I’m going to take this in stages,” Nichols said at the end of February’s hearing.
At the time, the government’s attorney John Bardo had argued that the duke’s records were “essentially the same” as sworn declarations by DHS officials already submitted into evidence and reviewed by the judge.
Those declarations led to Nichols’ ruling last year that “the public does not have a strong interest in disclosure of the duke’s immigration records.”
In a September lawsuit, the conservative think tank sued the DHS for access to Harry’s visa documents to determine whether he made false statements about prior drug use.
The former working royal admitted in his protocol-shattering book that he experimented with cocaine, cannabis and psychedelic mushrooms — behavior he would have been required to disclose on application forms filed before he relocated to the US in 2020.
Harry revealed that he tried cocaine when he was 17 years old “to feel different.”
“Of course I had been taking cocaine at that time,” he wrote in the book. “At someone’s house, during a hunting weekend, I was offered a line, and since then I had consumed some more.”
The Heritage Foundation insisted that Harry — who resides in Montecito, Calif., with wife Meghan Markle and their two children — didn’t mention his history with drugs on his application forms filed before he quit royal life and left the UK.
The foundation argued that the duke must have either provided false information on his forms or received preferential treatment.
As a result, the case was reopened in February following President Trump’s return to the White House.
Despite the controversy surrounding Prince Harry’s visa status, President Trump has ruled out any plans to deport him.
“I’ll leave him alone,” he exclusively told The Post in February.
Additional reporting by Josh Christenson