King Charles likely won’t strip the Sussexes of their titles: ‘It would be too petty’

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex take no money from the British taxpayers. They have a lease on Frogmore Cottage, which they pay full price for, and they “paid back” the renovation costs for that dilapidated shack even though it belongs to the Crown. Their clothes are not paid for by Charles or the Duchy of Cornwall. They agreed to not use their HRHs, nor brand anything commercially with “royal.” They live in Montecito, they make their own money and the only thing they still “have” from the Windsors is the Sussex titles given to them by Queen Elizabeth. That’s Meghan’s married name! And the braying British media is in a constant state of fury because Meghan still retains… her married name. Ahead of the premiere of Harry & Meghan Vol. 2, there’s once again a conversation about the Sussexes being “stripped” of their titles. Sources tell Page Six that King Charles won’t do it.

No matter how tense things get — and what ends up alleged in Thursday’s second installment of the Netflix docuseries “Harry & Meghan” — King Charles is very unlikely to ever strip the Sussexes of their titles, royal insiders say.

However, one palace source told Page Six: “Stripping their title is not something the king would likely ever consider … mostly because it would be too petty and punitive.”

Plus, the source added, “It would only lead to the Sussexes claiming that it was a retaliatory action and proof they were never wanted in the royal family.”

[From Page Six]

We’ve heard versions of this before, that it’s not that Charles has any particular warmth and familial devotion towards his son and daughter-in-law, it’s that Charles thinks he would look bad if he did it. Considering Charles IS a petty, devious, punitive and retaliatory man, I would assume that title-removal is still on the table, as is the title-removal for Harry’s children. But as other sources have said previously, if it happens, it probably won’t happen until next year, after Charles’s coronation.

Meanwhile, Katie Nicholl had another Vanity Fair piece ahead of the Netflix premiere, where she actually wrote these words with a straight face: “Viewers will have to wait and see what evidence, if any, Harry and Meghan have to support their serious allegations that the palace worked against them in order to protect Prince William and Kate Middleton.” Nicholl has literally gotten briefed by the Middletons for YEARS, including briefings from Kate and Carole. Nicholl has long been a recipient of William & Kate’s briefings against other people, including the Sussexes. She also writes about the first time Harry and William had a big fallout, and how it was about Harry getting heat for something William was doing too (partying at a bar). Harry was pissed at William for a while and Charles’s staff had to force the brothers to make peace. The point of the story is that William and Harry were always fighting about the same thing: Harry being used as cover for William, and now Harry refuses to play that game.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

72 Responses to “King Charles likely won’t strip the Sussexes of their titles: ‘It would be too petty’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. HeyKay says:

    He is not concerned with being petty.
    Charles knows that he can’t strip their titles because if he does, it just proves that those titles and the monarchy are all smoke and mirrors.
    H&M do not need any of it.

    • Blithe says:

      Yup, and that’s what makes this all so fascinating. Either they’re anointed by God and are these superior beings who are worthy of deference — or they’re not. And that includes Archie and Lili too. It’s one thing to strip someone’s title because of egregious behavior that damages the monarchy in some unforgivably treasonous way; it’s quite another thing altogether to strip birthright titles from small children because … something something about their parents annoys you. If Archie and Lili’s titles aren’t safe then NO title is really safe. I’m sure that most people get that — even if Billy Basher either doesn’t get it or doesn’t care.

      If Charles has good instincts or at least good advisors, he’ll use the time leading up to his coronation to publicly proclaim the permanence of Archie and Lili’s Prince and Princess titles — even if he also mumbles that “of course while they’re US residents, they won’t be using them publicly.”

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        The hilarious bit: Charles has neither good instincts, nor is he surrounded with good advisors. If anything, the advisors are even more small minded and petty than he is, and Chaz is pretty heckin petty. Recall how he treated Diana.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Blithe, as I’ve said many times before, they didn’t strip abdication Edward of his HRH or Duke of Windsor titles and he, IMO, was treasonous. I believe there’s enough evidence to prove that. If C-Rex wants to stir that up, then go ahead and strip titles. He better be prepared for what the blowback will be. If he’s smart, he’ll stay far away from that.

    • Dee says:

      Exactly. The minute I first saw the call to strip their titles, I knew it would never happen. And this is for the same reason that Congress will never go after any past president. Doing so would open up the idea that the monarchy’s titles are not that hard to remove, and the threat would be hanging over all future monarchs, heirs, etc. Which is why I hope Charles is stupid enough to do it. I cannot imagine that H&M would care very much if he did, and it certainly would not hurt their popularity—it would probably increase it.

      • Sugarhere says:

        Although it is technically within his prerogatives, I don’t think Chuck will ever strip the Sussexes of their titles. If he did, he would as well have to address Andrew’s sheltered status. And we know he promised mamma not to. Charles simply can’t afford the Andrew disgrace to fall once again under the inquisitive glare of public scrutiny.

        If he old man’s bruised ego is the yardstick by which one can lose a birth title, then Andrew’s status will have to be reviewed with hindsight. It’s laughable how they present not demoting the Sussexes as a magnanimus gesture from Charles when everybody knows his sausage fingers are tied / glued.

        The level of impunity Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson still shamelessly enjoy after the lasting discredit and dishonor they brought upon the royal family makes it impossible for Chuck to take drastic steps against the Sussexes.

  2. HeyKay says:

    Charles knows the monarchy is all smoke and mirrors.
    H&M do not need any of it.

  3. Dawning says:

    Please! Petty is Chuck’s middle name.

    • Lady D says:

      If I’ve learned anything about this royal family, it’s that you can practically count on them saying the exact opposite of what they mean. This is one dude who is petty af, and he enjoys what he thinks is revenge.

  4. usavgjoe says:

    I believe HM will give back those Titles on their own and tell the Royal Institution and the RR and BM “to go and you know what themselves.”

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      usavgjoe, and you know what the sad thing about that is? It would not stop any of the crap the bm (and the palaces) spew at H&M. IMO they should keep the titles and keep going forward. What they are doing through Archewell and individually will only reflect positively on the brf. That’s got to burn from the brf’s perspective.

  5. Deedlebug says:

    He can’t take Sussex from them. That is parliament’s territory. Parliament would never even consider it. He can only remove Royal titles. It would still be a bad look, but it’s also stupid simply because Meghan and the kids don’t use those titles anyway.

    • PunkPrincessPhD says:

      @Deedlebug: there are actually 2 private member’s bills that have been tabled to do just that (one was specifically prompted by Andrew, the other a response to H&M), but even if either were to pass the Commons, it would never get assent from the Lords. They couldn’t risk being subject to the same measures.

    • Jennifer says:

      He’s not removing them because he can’t. Otherwise he would. End of story.

  6. girl_ninja says:

    Charles worrying about being too petty is laughable. He is the King of Petty. Horrible old goat.

  7. Gwendolyn says:

    Charles, the king of petty, is really limited by what he can do to get back at the Sussex’s. That’s the gift of cutting them off already. All that’s left are the titles and even in the land bitterness, someone at BP still has enough working brain cells to realize the optics of taking titles away from the biracial daughter-in-law and grandchildren will do far more damage to the monarchy in multicultural Britain and the Commonwealth (that is already scrambling to exit). If the monarchy lasts to William, he won’t listen to the voice of reason and probably take the titles, so it’s just a matter of time.

    • Green girl says:

      I wonder if Charles won’t do anything about the titles but instead leave it to William to deal with whenever he ascends the throne.

  8. lanne says:

    Sure, taking titles away for…refusing to take abuse that no reasonable human being would accept? While royals who have taken bribes, paid off sex trafficking victims, tried to sell access to royals walk around holding their titles? It’s smart of Charles to nip that in ther bud.

    He also needs to stand down when it comes to Princess Lili and Prince Archie. The children’s titles are not bargaining chips. As a grandfather, he should be excluding the children from any conflict he may believe he has with the parents anyway. How royal will it look for him to retaliate against toddlers? It’s highly unlikely that those titles will ever be exercised other than for security in the UK (and would he deny his own grandchildren security?–well, yes he would, but he needs to be called out for exactly that.). The symbolic importance of those titles can’t be underestimated.

    The best tactic for Charles right now is to let William take the fall for the Sussexes leaving, and to stress that he loves his son, daughter in law, and grandchildren. He needs to remember the positive press he got for stepping up for Meghan on her wedding day, and his kindness to her mother. He should have capitalized on that all along, but he can certainly remind everyone of that now.

    He has nothing to gain from hating Harry and Meghan. He needs to stop enabling William’s rage, less the Wrath of Cain burn down the whole institution.

    • Chrissy says:

      Exactly, lanne. Totally agree. Chuck only goal is that he needs to maintain the monarchy at all costs because he knows Pegs will burn it to the ground if he gets the chance.

    • Jaded says:

      “The best tactic for Charles right now is to let William take the fall for the Sussexes leaving”. And I think that’s exactly what old Upchuck is doing. He knows #1 son is a lazy, tempermental loser and that #2 son SHOULD have been #1. Maybe his long game is to let William and Kate dig their own graves and try to woo Harry and Meghan into some kind of formalized position within the BRF, however I think it would be a fool’s errand to think they’d EVER come back in any way, shape or form.

    • Weetzie says:

      While I think Charles has a whole lot of problems and is both emotionally damaged and responsible for damaging a lot of people, I do think Harry is his favorite and he does genuinely love and like him so much more than William. And yes, he has really f*cked up ways of showing it, William knows it too. Super sucks for everyone that they’re all stuck with William though.

      • Tessa says:

        I don’t think harry is Charles favorite. The way harry and Meghan were treated during the mourning period was dreadful. Imo. I think Charles thinks of dynastic succession and let William run rampant. Charles just wanted Camilla to get that title and he could have helped harry and Meghan too but chose not to.

  9. Becks1 says:

    I don’t think Charles is going to touch their titles. He may want to, but it just opens up a pandora’s box about titles in general.

    Katie Nicholl…..LOLOLOL.. I can’t believe she wrote that with a straight face as she then went on to describe a time when Harry was used to deflect from William.

    • Rapunzel says:

      Exactly Becks- the only reason he isn’t doing it is because he can’t just strip the Sussexes.

    • CECIIVA says:

      I truly hope the Rota does loudly demand that Meghan and Harry provide proof…because then they can release the cases of receipts we know they must have.

    • Elizabeth says:

      Katie Nicholl, the woman who wrote fan fiction about Harry and Meghan’s first date, drinking rose wine at some venue in Kensington? That Katie Nicholl? The woman who has written multiple books about the royal family? Either the family has been briefing against the Sussexes or every royal reporter has been writing fan fiction for the past 5-plus years.

  10. molly says:

    Prince Edward and Wallis Simpson got to keep their Windsor titles, and they were Nazi-loving quitters that nearly destroyed the monarchy. Fergie has done a ton of untoward and unroyal things, including trying to sell access to Prince Andrew (at the time, 4th in line to the thrown!), and SHE got to keep her Duchess title.

    Sussex haters really need to relax on this one. History is not on their side.

    • Tessa says:

      Wallis did not get the her royal highness title. She was entitled to it upon marriage. George issued letters.patent to keep her from getting h r h .

  11. DARK says:

    If the titles were removed there would be nothing left to threaten with. Not for the BRF or the media. They want to talk about it so they can whip up their readers rage and get those clicks and I am sure they would be tickled for a minute if it happened but then what..

    • ThatsNotOkay says:

      Exactly. It’s not because he’s not petty or corrupt, it’s ’cause he’s not completely stupid and is instead calculating.

  12. Lorelei says:

    Lmao, all of a sudden he’s concerned about looking petty? 😂 Too bad this didn’t occur to him before he spent months on end whining about The Crown.

  13. Amy Bee says:

    In the last few days I’ve seen some journalists including Katie Nicholl admit that the Palace briefs against family members however they maintain that Harry and Meghan have to show proof that it was done. The gaslighting has begun. If Harry and Meghan don’t state specific names and instances, the press is going to dismiss their claims as wild accusations. Talking about Kate making Meghan cry is not going to cut it unless they state who was in the room, who knew of the incident and if they can link a courtier to the leak. As for the titles, I think Harry and Meghan will keep their titles for the reasons claimed but Archie and Lili will never be declared Prince and Princess.

    • ThatsNotOkay says:

      Archie and Lili already are Prince and Princess. The question is whether Charles will remove that from them as well.

      • Amy Bee says:

        And Lady Louise Windsor is supposed to be Princess Louise. As long as the line of succession omits Prince and Princess from Archie’s and Lili’s names take that to mean that officially they are not Prince and Princess.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Amy Bee, iirc the Wessexes wanted to wait until their children were of age for them to decide whether they would use the title. The Sussexes on the other hand wanted Archie to have the HRH Price title because 1) it is his heritage and 2) he would get security.

  14. MrsBanjo says:

    He doesn’t have the power to take their Sussex titles. Only Parliament does, and unless they’re just as short-sighted as the RF (which is possible), they wouldn’t dare because of the avalanche that would cause – not just the question of Andrew and his title, but the aristocracy. They’re not going to go along with the idea of the King having the ability to revoke titles on a petty whim.

    • Colby says:

      This. I think everyone involved knows the bigger they make the issue, the more people will scrutinize the institution as a whole.

  15. Laura D says:

    I “think” if Labour gets in and gets rid of the House of Lords then there’s a possibility that Charles might remove H&M’s titles. However, although I do believe Charles can be petty I honestly don’t believe he’s in a hurry to remove their titles. Despite what we all believe to be true (that he’s a terrible father) Harry is still his son. I “think” his vanity comes into play here and the thought of one of his sons not being a Prince wouldn’t be something he would be comfortable with.

    It’s the tabloids and their attack dogs who NEED Harry to lose his title because otherwise they have nothing to fill their column inches. We’ve seen from the documentary there are plenty of pictures and stories about H&M and their family it’s just that the rats don’t have access.

    O/T: That picture of family in uniform saluting TQ is heartbreaking. If Charles really wants to show he’s “forgiven” his son he really should give him an army patronage.

    • Alexandria says:

      The attack dogs don’t need H to give up the titles. They need to constantly TALK about H giving up the titles so that they can sell. They would have lesser attack material if it really happened. What or who else can they talk about if it happened? Chuck? Cam? Pegs? Mumbles? 😏

  16. HeatherC says:

    Removing titles is a can of worms no one over there wants to open. Especially the House of Lords. It’s not about him lookin bad, he’s been strongly advised to not ask Parliament to do anything like that because it would affect them as well in ways they don’t want. It’s not about Harry and Meghan at all.

  17. Chantal says:

    Haha C-Rex has done nothing but show his petty and vindictive side. IOW, the aristocracy has spoken. Did the bill moving thru Parliament that would allow the monarch the right to remove titles actually fail to pass? I wonder if the aristocracy looked at Chuck and his s**tshow reign and said hell no.
    However, C-Rex will definitely strip the Sussex children of their titles. He’s probably salivating as he weighs revenge vs optics. I think revenge will win.

    • Dara says:

      Still in the early stages if I’m reading this correctly.

      • Laura D says:

        Thanks Dara. I’m surprised 4Takes, Levin et el haven’t mentioned this more when they’re ranting about taking away titles. Possibly because it was raised by a Labour MP? 🙂

    • Jaded says:

      It’s under review by the House of Commons then has to go through several more readings in the House of Lords before Upchuck reviews it and rubber-stamps it. If the Labour party wins in early 2025 then you might see the House of Lords dismantled, so it’s incumbent upon the Tory party to stay in, otherwise the bill will likely pass.

  18. Brassy Rebel says:

    They won’t have their titles stripped and it has nothing to do with Charles not wanting to appear petty. He certainly wasn’t worried about that when he repeatedly tried to humiliate Harry during the queen’s funeral. Rather, it’s all about preserving the monarchy, as is everything with these people. It seems that Charles and his advisors believe that once they start down this road of stripping titles, there’s no telling how far it will go. And that’s not a risk worth taking.

    • Jaded says:

      Upchuck can’t remove titles on his own, only Parliament can do this. There’s a bill a Labour MP has tabled that would give the right to strip titles to the reigning monarch, but I doubt it will get past the House of Lords. If the Labour party wins in 2025, the bill may very well pass as the House of Lords would likely be dismantled.

  19. Liz Version 700k says:

    Translation if I could legally be this petty I totally would. However, if I could it would be a disaster so I will pretend I am a better person. But I’m not I am Charles the Turd King of Petty

  20. JCallas says:

    I think the children’s titles have already been stripped, unofficially . Charles just isn’t going to announce it. As for the other titles, Charles knows he can’t remove them without taking away Andrew’s too.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      JCallas, wouldn’t he have to rewrite the existing document that gave those title automatically upon QE2’s death? If so, how do you keep that quite? If he had done that, I rather think H&M would know. Afterall, there isn’t any reason to do it if you’re not going to stick the knife in.

  21. Dara says:

    Honestly, I think Charles is exactly this petty and vindictive. The only things holding him back are the red tape and optics.

    If public opinion in the UK takes a sharp anti-Sussex turn (and if the tabloids keep going the way they have, that’s entirely possible), he may be able to justify stripping the titles as placating his outraged subjects and standing up for the dignity of the monarchy, blah, blah, blah. He could portray himself as the monarch who puts his realm above his family, with lots of public performative grief about being forced into this regretful decision by the actions of his black sheep son and his attention hungry American wife, etc. etc. The tabloid stories practically write themselves.

    • Blithe says:

      I’m stuck, and I still don’t get it. Charles is elderly, William is ill-suited, George is nine. If Charles and William really do want the monarchy to continue beyond them, why not hold back for another decade or so — until George is of age? Isn’t this situation just an illness or two and a dramatic bolt away from needing Harry as a Regent? Maybe Charles and William just can’t help themselves, but, to me, much of this feels like the opposite of putting realm above family.

      The dysfunction is staggering. I’ve often wondered if anyone will write a well-done, comprehensive psycho-history type of biography of the BRF. I also wondered, even at Meghan and Harry’s wedding, what Meghan’s trained-in-social-work Mom was REALLY thinking while she watched this stuff unfold and unravel.

  22. Jayne says:

    Oh, how I wish they’d announce a rebrand/name change to Mr./Mrs.(Lord/Lady?) Mountbatten-Windsor. They can match the kids. Tell Chuckles to take their HRHs/Sussex titles and shove them.

    • Blue Nails Betty says:

      It would be more hilarious if they change their name to Ragland-Spencer. 😁

    • Kazzie says:

      Their surname is already Mountbatten-Windsor , that change happened the second William became Prince of Wales

  23. Solidgold says:

    TBH, they should have removed the titles or at least state they cannot be used as they are not representing the monarch when Harry stepped back.

    But the real problem is they do not want to remove Harry’s title they just want Meghan and their kids not to have titles.

    • Becks1 says:

      titles have nothing to do with representing the monarchy. Edward was made Earl (with a promised dukedom in the future) and when he got married he was not supposed to be a working royal.

      They took away the HRH for all intents and purposes, but made no move on the titles.

  24. Deneph says:

    I think the title stripping suggestions are all coming from William, he just wants to punish the Sussex’ any way he can and he’s running out of ways to do it.

    • Jaded says:

      The title stripping matter is actually a bill that a Labour party MP submitted. If Labour wins in the next general election it may come to fruition, but the BRF is firmly Tory-aligned so the issue is moot for the time being.

  25. Chantal says:

    @DARA Thanks. So its still in the House of Commons and the first reading was June 2022 and the second reading is scheduled for March 2023. It’s almost like this simple and straightforward bill is being slow-walked…

  26. BeanieBean says:

    I’m so confused. Didn’t we just read in the past week or so that Charles wants to revoke all titles for the Sussexes? Hasn’t that been the recurring theme the last weeks & months, at least since QEIIs funeral? Before his coronation, after his coronation, & on & on? I think these tabloid writers forget what they’ve written.

    • Jaded says:

      It’s just noise. Upchuck can’t revoke titles, only Parliament can do it for the time being. If the Labour party wins in 2025 then the bill to give the monarch power to strip titles that’s currently being read in the House of Commons, then goes to the House of Lords for reading, may very well pass, but the BRF is firmly Tory and will do anything to keep them in power.

  27. Mooney says:

    Still, that picture of King Harry being surrounded by his elderly guards 🤣🤣🤣🤣look at them all saluting while he looks tall,firm and dignified (not to forget handsome) in his morning suit….

    They wanted to humiliate him but it backfired royally,pun intended 😂

  28. Jay says:

    AKA he would love to be able to strip them of their titles as a punishment…just not right now with everyone watching.

    That would indeed look petty, especially if he lets Andrew keep his titles. Charles has a slightly better sense of public opinion than others in his family, especially when it comes to Harry. After all, he ended up reversing course somewhat on Harry wearing a uniform due to public opinion.
    However, I personally think Charles’ bigger problem is that he is very aware of his own public image, and he always wants it both ways. Like how he initially messed up the call about Harry wearing his uniform, and then spent the week (sort of) making little concessions here and there. In the end, he pleased nobody – Harry haters thought he shouldn’t be allowed to wear dress uniform or be part of the funeral. Harry supporters were mad that he was only given permission to wear it at the last minute, and the Queen’s insignia was conspicuously absent. So basically, he made a mess of things and pissed off both sides.

    I believe this is a similar situation – he wants (needs!) the support of the people who want him to disown his youngest son and his family, to make an example of them, but he also doesn’t want to look like a completely racist a-hole, at least not while the whole world is watching.

    • Flower says:

      The bigger question is why is he allowing Andrew to keep his titles ? Especially now Liz and Filip have popped their clogs ?

      I think Chuckles is compromised and Andy knows a little too much to be cut loose. I also think that is why the £12 was brokered and paid for in exchange for CamCam being Queen.

      This family is a bunch of treasonous snakes, another reason why Chuckles didn’t want H&M to leave. I bet there are some real secrets Harry could tell and still this family bait him endlessly.

  29. sammi says:

    I cannot work out if Charlie wants The Sussexes to come to the Coronation or not.
    First date announced was Lili’s birthday and when that clashed with football it was changed to Archie’s Birthday in May which has two bank holidays already but now a third for the Coronation!
    Is he trying to ensure the children come and he gets a photo with them? Seems strange when it was not acceptable for Harry and Meghan to want a photo with his grandmother and the children’s great grand mother who had little time left on this earth when she saw then at her Jubilee.

    Hope they come and shine or stay away and shine and please do not bring those beautiful children to this cess pit of a family.

  30. QuiteContrary says:

    If the titles are taken away, then every time Meghan and Harry are referred to as the “former duchess and duke,” Charles’ reputation is going to take a hit, whether he drives the decision or not.

    People, especially Americans, are going to see Meghan and Harry’s good works and think they’re more genuine leaders than the royals.

  31. TheVolvesSeidr says:

    Question for those of you in know please. I keep seeing on twitter et al that if their titles are removed, H&M will then be Prince and Princess Henry of Wales for ever and ever amen (so they’re saying online). Is that true? TIA!

  32. The Old Chick says:

    Because I AM very petty, I am loving that the RR are not calling her Princess Kate, but still KM. You know CarolE especially wanted her to be just like Princess Di. 🤣🤣🤣 The petty in me laughs hysterically. (I know the do the formal at times but it’s mostly KM.)

  33. Christine says:

    Kaiser, your choice of a photo, where Chuck looks like the ghost of Christmas past, has made my day!