Prince Harry subject of US court case which could result in his removal from the country
In a stroke of legal coincidence, Prince Harry will be the subject of a court case in America on the same day he is due to appear in London’s High Court.
Lawyers are due in a federal courtroom in Washington DC to demand the US government release the Duke of Sussex’s US visa application form, a move which could result in his removal from the country.
The case hinges on how the Duke of Sussex answered questions about drug-taking on his US visa form when he applied for a visa allowing him to move to America in March 2020.
An American conservative political research group, the Heritage Foundation, has filed a lawsuit against America’s Department for Homeland Security (DHS) to establish if the correct rules were followed in granting the duke his visa.
In his Netflix series and in his memoir, Spare, Prince Harry admitted to having used cocaine, marijuana and magic mushrooms.
Under US law, admission of, or evidence of past drug use, can be grounds to reject a visa application.
Lawyers for the Heritage Foundation point to two key questions in the US DS160 visa form.
The first asks: “Have you ever been a drug abuser or addict?”
The second asks: “Have you ever violated, or engaged in a conspiracy to violate, any law relating to controlled substances?”
Read more:
Prince Harry accused of wasting High Court’s time
Analysis: Prince Harry has score to settle in High Court appearance
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
US court to hear challenge over Prince Harry’s visa
‘There’s a real serious question as to whether or not he should have been admitted’
Speaking to Sky News ahead of the court hearing, the counsel for the Heritage Foundation, Sam Dewey said: “The government has taken the position that ‘there’s nothing to see here’.
“We’ve taken the position that no, if you look through all the details of his admissions, you look at the drug laws, you look at the laws on admissions, there’s a real serious question as to whether or not he should have been admitted.”
He continued: “The alternative, if he didn’t disclose the drug use – then there’s a very serious question as to whether or not proceedings should have begun against him for that.”
Speaking on behalf of his client, Mr Dewey said the Heritage Foundation’s case was overwhelmingly in the public interest and based on a wider suspicion that the DHS is not acting according to procedure when granting visas.
Lawyers point to other celebrities who had visas denied for previous drug use
Prince Harry’s visa application is the most recent and most high-profile example of the process being called into question.
Mr Dewey said: “We view it as a very serious question – why he’s let in, no problem, given everything that we know [about his drug use] which we’ve explained in detail, and others aren’t let in.”
As part of the evidence for the case, Heritage Foundation lawyers point to other celebrities including the celebrity chef Nigella Lawson and musician Pete Doherty who have in the past been denied visas, or had the process delayed, for previous drug use.
In 2010, Doherty was allowed to fly to the US and arrived at JFK airport in New York before he was sent back home on the next flight. Doherty has a string of drug convictions.
In 2013, Lawson confessed in her divorce court proceedings that she had taken cocaine and marijuana. The following year she was prevented from boarding a flight to Los Angeles, California. After a long process, she was eventually granted a visa.
Pic: AP
Judge will rule on whether it is in public interest to release prince’s application form
Nile Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Centre for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation, said: “Did DHS in fact look the other way, play favourites, or fail to appropriately respond to any potential false statements by Prince Harry?”
The hearing could last weeks.
It will begin with a ruling by the judge as to whether the US Customs and Border Protection Agency must accelerate its work to determine what records they hold of the visa application.
Ultimately the judge must rule on whether it is in the public interest to release the prince’s application form, or parts of it.
The public will then find out if he either lied and claimed he had never taken drugs, or he admitted taking them and the US government allowed him in anyway.
The Prince’s spokesperson has not responded to Sky News’s request for comment.
Donald Trump has praised the Liberian president’s command of English – the West African country’s official language.
The US president reacted with visible surprise to Joseph Boakai’s English-speaking skills during a White House meeting with leaders from the region on Wednesday.
After the Liberian president finished his brief remarks, Mr Trump told him he speaks “such good English” and asked: “Where did you learn to speak so beautifully?”
Mr Trump seemed surprised when Mr Boakai laughed and responded he learned in Liberia.
The US president said: “It’s beautiful English.
“I have people at this table who can’t speak nearly as well.”
Mr Boakai did not tell Mr Trump that English is the official language of Liberia.
The country was founded in 1822 with the aim of relocating freed African slaves and freeborn black citizens from the US.
👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈
Mr Trump promised the leaders of Liberia, Senegal, Gabon, Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau a pivot from aid to trade at the surprise meeting.
He described the countries as “all very vibrant places with very valuable land, great minerals, and great oil deposits, and wonderful people”.
Read more from Sky News:
Gaza permanent ceasefire ‘questionable’, says Israeli official
Four dead and ‘many’ kidnapped after Houthi rebels sink ship
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
Later asked by a reporter if he’ll visit the continent, Mr Trump said, “At some point, I would like to go to Africa.”
But he added that he’d “have to see what the schedule looks like”.
Trump’s predecessor, President Joe Biden, promised to go to Africa in 2023, but only fulfilled the commitment by visiting Angola in December 2024, just weeks before he left office.
The Israeli government believes the chances of achieving a permanent ceasefire in Gaza are “questionable”.
The pessimistic assessment, in a top-level Israeli government briefing given to Sky News, comes as the Israeli Prime Minister prepares to leave Washington DC after a four-day visit which had begun with the expectation of a ceasefire announcement.
Benjamin Netanyahu will leave the US later today with the prospect of even a temporary 60-day ceasefire looking extremely unlikely this week.
Within “a week, two weeks – not a day” is how it was framed in the background briefing late on Wednesday.
Crucially, though, on the chances of the ceasefire lasting beyond 60 days, the framing from the briefing was even less optimistic: “We will begin negotiations on a permanent settlement. But we achieve it? It’s questionable, but Hamas will not be there.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Netanyahu arrives in US for ceasefire talks
Sky News has spoken to several Israeli officials at the top level of the government. None will be drawn on any of the details of the negotiations over concerns that public disclosure could jeopardise their chances of success.
But I have been given a very clear understanding of Mr Netanyahu’s thinking.
The Israeli position is that a permanent ceasefire (beyond the initial 60 days, which itself is yet to be agreed) is only possible if Hamas lays down its arms. “If they don’t, we’ll proceed [with the war],” said a source.
The major sticking point in the talks between Hamas and Israel is the status of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) inside Gaza during the 60-day ceasefire and beyond, should it last longer.
The latest Israeli proposal, passed to Hamas last week, included a map showing the proposed IDF presence inside Gaza during the ceasefire.
Read more: What is the possible Gaza hostage and ceasefire deal?
Pic: Reuters
This was rejected by Hamas and by Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, who reportedly told the Israelis that the redeployment map “looks like a Smotrich plan”, a reference to the extreme-right Israeli finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich.
My briefing of Mr Netanyahu’s position is that he has not shifted in terms of Israel’s central stated war aims. The return of the hostages and eliminating Hamas are the key objectives.
But in a hint of how hard it will be to reconcile the differences, it was clear from my briefing that no permanent ceasefire is possible in the Israeli government’s view without the complete removal of Hamas as a political and military entity.
Hamas is not likely to negotiate its way to oblivion.
On the status of the Israeli military inside Gaza, a senior Israeli official told Sky News: “We would want IDF in every square metre of Gaza, and then hand it over to someone.”
Pic: Reuters
It was clear to me that Mr Netanyahu wants his stated position to be that his government has no territorial ambition for Gaza.
One quote to come from my briefing, which I am only able to attribute to a senior Israeli official, says: “[We] don’t want to govern Gaza… don’t want to govern, but the first thing is, you have to defeat Hamas.”
Another clear indication of Mr Netanyahu’s position – a quote from the briefing, attributable only to a senior Israeli official: “You cannot have victory if you don’t clear out all the fighting forces.
“You have to go into every square inch unless you are not serious about victory. I am. We are going to defeat them. Those who do not disarm will die. Those who disarm will have a life.”
On the future of Gaza, it’s clear from my briefings that Mr Netanyahu continues to rule out the possibility of a two-state solution “for the foreseeable future”.
The Israeli government assessment is that the Palestinians are not going to have a state “as long as they cling to that idea of destroying our state”.
Read more:
UN Special Rapporteur criticises Israel
Why Netanyahu only wants a 60-day ceasefire
Trump applying ‘heavy pressure’ on Netanyahu
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
On the most controversial aspect of the Gaza conflict – the movement of the population – the briefing revealed that Mr Netanyahu’s view is that 60% of Palestinians would “choose to leave” but that Israel would allow them to return once Hamas had been eliminated.
“It’s not forcible eviction, it’s not permanent eviction,” a senior Israeli official said.
Critics of Israel’s war in Gaza say that any removal of Palestinians from Gaza, even if given the appearance of being “voluntary”, is in fact anything but, because the strip has been so comprehensively flattened.
Reacting to Israeli Defence Minister Katz’s recent statement revealing a plan to move Palestinians into a “humanitarian city” in southern Gaza, and not let them out of that area, the official wouldn’t be drawn, except to say: “As a permanent arrangement? Of course not.”
A senior Israeli official has issued a less-than-optimistic assessment of the permanency of any ceasefire in Gaza.
Speaking in Washington on condition of anonymity, the senior official said that a 60-day ceasefire “might” be possible within “a week, two weeks – not a day”.
But on the chances of the ceasefire lasting beyond 60 days, the official said: “We will begin negotiations on a permanent settlement.
“But we achieve it? It’s questionable, but Hamas will not be there.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is due to conclude a four-day visit to Washington later today.
There had been hope that a ceasefire could be announced during the trip. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly stated that it’s close.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Netanyahu arrives in US for ceasefire talks
Speaking at a briefing for a number of reporters, the Israeli official would not be drawn on any of the details of the negotiations over concerns that public disclosure could jeopardise their chances of success.
The major sticking point in the talks between Hamas and Israel is the status of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) inside Gaza during the 60-day ceasefire and beyond, should it last longer.
The latest Israeli proposal, passed to Hamas last week, included a map showing the proposed IDF presence inside Gaza during the ceasefire.
Read more: What is the possible Gaza hostage and ceasefire deal?
Pic: Reuters
This was rejected by Hamas and by Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, who reportedly told the Israelis that the redeployment map “looks like a Smotrich plan”, a reference to the extreme-right Israeli finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich.
The official repeated Israel’s central stated war aims of getting the hostages back and eliminating Hamas. But in a hint of how hard it will be to reconcile the differences, the official was clear that no permanent ceasefire would be possible without the complete removal of Hamas.
“We will offer them a permanent ceasefire,” he told Sky News. “If they agree. Fine. It’s over.
“They lay down their arms, and we proceed [with the ceasefire]. If they don’t, we’ll proceed [with the war].”
On the status of the Israeli military inside Gaza, the official said: “We would want IDF in every square meter of Gaza, and then hand it over to someone…”
He added: “[We] don’t want to govern Gaza… don’t want to govern, but the first thing is, you have to defeat Hamas…”
Pic: Reuters
The official said the Israeli government had “no territorial designs for Gaza”.
“But [we] don’t want Hamas there,” he continued. “You have to finish the job… victory over Hamas. You cannot have victory if you don’t clear out all the fighting forces.
“You have to go into every square inch unless you are not serious about victory. I am. We are going to defeat them. Those who do not disarm will die. Those who disarm will have a life.”
On the future of Gaza, the official ruled out the possibility of a two-state solution “for the foreseeable future”.
“They are not going to have a state in the foreseeable future as long as they cling to that idea of destroying our state. It doesn’t make a difference if they are the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, it’s just a difference of tactics.”
Read more:
UN Special Rapporteur criticises Israel
Why Netanyahu only wants a 60-day ceasefire
Trump applying ‘heavy pressure’ on Netanyahu
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
On the most controversial aspect of the Gaza conflict – the movement of the population – the official predicted that 60% of Palestinians would “choose to leave”.
But he claimed that Israel would allow them to return once Hamas had been eliminated, adding: “It’s not forcible eviction, it’s not permanent eviction.”
Critics of Israel’s war in Gaza say that any removal of Palestinians from Gaza, even if given the appearance of being “voluntary,” is in fact anything but, because the strip has been so comprehensively flattened.
Reacting to Israeli Defence Minister Katz’s recent statement revealing a plan to move Palestinians into a “humanitarian city” in southern Gaza, and not let them out of that area, the official wouldn’t be drawn, except to say: “As a permanent arrangement? Of course not.”
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike