Prince Harry's recent remarks have raised doubts about his possession of a green card and his pursuit of US citizenship. In a subtle manner, he hinted at the possibility that he may not have the coveted Green Card required for American citizenship. According to experts, the Duke of Sussex has informed UK authorities that he now considers the United States his usual residence, alongside his wife Meghan Markle. After their journey from Windsor to Canada, they eventually settled in sunny California in 2020. Last week, Prince Harry officially declared the US as his primary place of residence, coinciding with their departure from Frogmore Cottage in June 2023.
Observant individuals noted the deliberate omission of the term "permanent residence," which suggests that Prince Harry may still lack a green card. The green card is an important step towards obtaining US citizenship and serves as an initial milestone in the naturalization process. Charlotte Slokum, a knowledgeable partner at the prestigious immigration law firm Fragman, explained that the term "residency" encompasses various visa categories, indicating that an individual is not a tourist but does not reveal the specific visa type held. The absence of the term "permanent residence" implies the individual's lack of a green card.
Slokum further clarified that Prince Harry can maintain his temporary immigration status in the US by holding either an A1 diplomatic visa or an O1 extraordinary ability or achievement visa indefinitely, without the need to become a permanent resident or US citizen. Despite pressure from The Heritage Foundation, a Washington DC-based think tank, details regarding Prince Harry's visa status have been scarce. The foundation has requested the release of his immigration documents, citing the public interest, as Prince Harry openly admitted to experimenting with drugs in his memoir. Under current US immigration regulations, individuals who have used or admitted to using drugs can be barred from entering the country.
However, John Bardo, a lawyer representing the Biden Administration, countered the argument by stating that the Duke's autobiography is not sworn testimony or proof of his drug use. Bardo emphasized that merely stating something in a book does not necessarily make it true. During the initial hearing on the case in February, Bardo highlighted the importance of distinguishing between literary expression and factual evidence.
