Prince's US visa application should stay private: judge

In his ruling seen in court documents on Monday, US judge Carl Nichols said "the public does not have a strong interest in disclosure of the duke's immigration records". 

His judgment added: "Like any foreign national, the duke has a legitimate privacy interest in his immigration status. 

"And the duke's public statements about his travel and drug use did not disclose, and therefore did not eliminate his interest in keeping private, specific information regarding his immigration status, applications, or other materials." 

The Heritage Foundation brought the lawsuit against the Department for Homeland Security (DHS) after a Freedom of Information Act request was rejected, with the think tank claiming it was of "immense public interest". 

Judge Nichols went on to say the public's interest in disclosure of Harry's immigration records is "outweighed by the duke's privacy interest". 

"Public disclosure of records about a single admission of a foreign national in the circumstances described above would provide the public, at best, limited information about the department's general policy in admitting aliens.

"And the marginal public benefit of knowing that limited information is outweighed by the privacy interest the duke retains in his immigration status and records." 

Some of the judgment has been redacted - in particular facts Prince Harry has not disclosed publicly in relation to his immigration status and records, and what was contained in his visa application. 

In his controversial memoir, the royal said cocaine "didn't do anything for me", adding: "Marijuana is different, that actually really did help me." 

The Heritage Foundation's lawsuit argued that US law "generally renders such a person inadmissible for entry" to the country. 

The think tank also said answers on Prince Harry's prior drug use in his visa application should have been disclosed as they could raise questions over the US government's integrity.