As the second day of court proceedings in London’s High Court were concluding, a judge 3,000 miles away in a US Federal Court was also talking about the Duke of Sussex.
It was certainly an unusual stroke of legal coincidence.
In courtroom number 17 of the E Barrett Prettyman US Courthouse in Washington DC, Judge Carl Nichols was hearing the opening arguments of a curious case which Prince Harry finds himself embroiled in.
It hinges around the duke’s US visa application and specifically two questions within that application which he would have been required to answer (under oath) when he applied for the visa to move to America in 2020.
The first of the key questions, in America’s Department for Homeland Security DH160 visa form, 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?”
But why is this case being heard? Well, it was brought by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative US-based think tank which likes to hold the centre-left administration of President Joe Biden to account.
For some time it’s been examining the role of the Department for Homeland Security (DHS) and specifically immigration issues.
One angle it’s spent time on is the consistency with which the DHS applies its own policies when granting visas to visitors.
Their allegation is that the DHS operates double standards and preferential treatment from time to time.
Read more about Harry’s UK case:
Prince Harry blames tabloids for casting him as a ‘thicko’ and a ‘playboy’
The key people named in Harry’s witness statement
Which articles have been brought up?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Prince Harry is the perfect case study
Enter Prince Harry. He is, for the Heritage Foundation, the perfect case study. He has publicly admitted taking drugs (in his book, Spare) and he was granted a visa.
The Heritage Foundation failed to obtain the visa application through a freedom of information request. The US government and the DHS cited the prince’s privacy.
So, they went to court and want a judge to instruct the DHS to unseal Prince Harry’s visa application, or at least, the relevant parts of it – those two questions.
Either the prince answered truthfully, prompting the question – why was he granted a visa without further interrogation as is standard procedure? Or, he lied and said he hadn’t taken drugs which would put him in very hot water with the US authorities – perjury.
Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts
Heritage Foundation insists case is about DHS
The Heritage Foundation’s central protagonist is Nile Gardiner, a former aide to Margaret Thatcher and a man who has been, publicly, deeply critical of the prince and his wife – “greedy narcissists pursuing a disastrous vendetta”.
He and his lawyer insist this case isn’t really about them. “This is about the Duke of Sussex…” the Heritage Foundation’s lawyer said in court, “… but truly, it’s about the DHS.”
Inescapably though, Prince Harry is a neatly convenient case study for an organisation which has issues with the Biden administration and with the duke.
A curious case, then, which will be the subject of much more legal argument before a judge decides whether or not it is in the public interest to release the prince’s visa application for all to see.
