WSJ: Prince William has ‘leverage’ over the Sussexes, he can remove their titles

It’s been interesting to watch British and American media center Prince William within the story of the Sussex Return. It happened quickly too, once the initial shock of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s return-to-the-UK announcement passed, the feeling of “oh wow, Prince William is going to be FURIOUS.” Even mainstream outlets like the Wall Street Journal are framing it that way too. The WSJ had a piece this week called “Prodigal Prince Harry’s Return to U.K. Poses Dilemma for William.” It starts with fears of a rival royal court and ends with royalists’ self-soothing argument that history will not remember the Sussexes. I kid you not.

Low-wattage William & Kate: In Harry’s absence, William and his wife, Catherine, Princess of Wales, took over the mantle in polling as Britain’s most popular royals. The couple have devised a low-wattage approach aimed at not rocking the boat in a bid to show that unshowy duty is what Britons want from their royal family. Despite this demure exterior, former employees say the Sussexes and the Waleses have spent years monitoring one another from afar on social media, jostling to capture favorable headlines.

The far-away problem: In California, Prince Harry could be treated as a faraway problem and was largely ignored by palace courtiers, who routinely refused to comment on the verbal grenades launched by the man fifth-in-line for the throne. The Sussexes’ return to the royal threshold means this strategy will likely have to be revised.

Pressure on William: Once back in Britain, royal watchers say, there will be growing pressure for William to extend an olive branch to his younger brother while their father, who is 77, continues to undergo treatment for cancer. A poll released Monday in the U.K. showed that 58% of those surveyed in Britain wanted the royal siblings to reconcile, further adding pressure on the royal family to bring the king’s younger son back into the fold.

An unprecedented rival royal court: “It is unprecedented in a modern sense,” Andrew Roberts, a British historian and royal biographer, said of Harry’s return. The Windsors have traditionally dealt with awkward family members by keeping them abroad, he added, as was the case with Edward VIII after he abdicated and lived out his days with his American divorcée wife in France. The big question now, Roberts said, is whether the Sussexes try to steal the limelight in England, casting themselves as a trendier celebrity alternative to the establishment royals—a modern version of a rival court. “Under those circumstances, William might have cause to be worried.” A person close to the Sussexes said the notion that they would set up a rival court was “utterly ridiculous.”

William’s leverage: William, for his part, has said nothing publicly on the matter since the Sussexes announced their return to British shores. But longer-term, the heir to the throne has leverage over his brother. Should he become king, William might choose to prune the royal family tree, removing the HRH titles from the Sussex children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, though not cutting them out of the line of succession. “Harry’s historical irrelevance in the long run is guaranteed,” wrote Diana’s biographer Andrew Morton in a recent Substack. “How many people could name King George VI’s four brothers or his sister? How many people under 30 could pick out Sophie, Duchess of Edinburgh, or Prince Edward, in a lineup?”

[From The Wall Street Journal]

It’s true that very few people could pick Sophie or Edward out of a lineup. It’s also true that the average Briton doesn’t check for William or Kate, despite their careful “low wattage approach” (lol). The thing about William’s “leverage” is that they presuppose that people only pay attention to the Sussexes because of their titles, and once the titles go away, so will the attention. Considering the global attention the Reverse Sussexit has already gotten, that argument is hilariously stupid. In the same breath they’re acknowledging the still-titled Edward and Sophie’s lack of appeal, they’re saying Harry & Meghan are nothing but titles. Ha. Still, it’s interesting that “a source close to the Sussexes” rejected the idea of a rival royal court. It’s funny because Harry and Meghan have had a rival royal court this whole time, it’s just been in Montecito. All of this goes to a larger point: the Windsors still do not understand that they’re operating in a global media market, and that everyone outside of the UK can see their behavior.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

40 Responses to “WSJ: Prince William has ‘leverage’ over the Sussexes, he can remove their titles”

  1. Tessa says:

    The Scooters have low wattage approach, they work very little and vacation a lot. Is Andrew Morton trying to score points with Scooter? I can name the siblings of George VI: Edward, George (Duke of Kent), Princess Mary, John, Henry. The Duke of Windsor got a lot of PR throughout his life and did not hide away. He wrote a book A King’s Story, his life story has garnered more books and movies than his brother, George VI. ANd he and Wallis got to to to events in the UK from the Early Sixties. I think Scooter is going to get a rude awakening if he tries to take titles away.

  2. bellatrix says:

    A “low-wattage approach … [of] unshowy duty” ?!?! HAHAHA. How many ways can they say lazy without saying lazy??

    • Puff Updater says:

      Lololol @Bellatrix. And I wouldn’t be surprised if Harry has let Bulliam know that if he pulls any stunts to endanger his children, he will unleash stories far more shocking than shoving his brother into a dog bowl.

  3. Jan says:

    Titles have been the origin of interest in all of these people but it’s personality, action and energy that keep us interested.
    So yeah nobody cares about Pegs and Keen.

    The British press is messed up; so viscous and vile. It must suck to live in that space

  4. ABritGuest says:

    One thing that rings true is the wales have been monitoring H&M. We’ve seen so much copy katying from William & Kate and Kate even took to wearing Californian brands. I’m so curious if she will continue with random california brands and others that Meghan made popular like aquzurra with Meghan in uk 😅

  5. Sparkling Water says:

    I’m getting really exasperated and disappointed with mainstream US outlets misinforming and misinterpreting this whole situation. No, William cannot remove titles lmao. Is WSJ’s readership really asking for this?

    • windyriver says:

      It’s not exactly true that a monarch can’t remove titles. Depends what you’re talking about. What he can’t do is change the line of succession (so the WSJ article implication Will can is BS), or remove Harry’s DOS title. However, in addition to removing HRH, I believe he can remove Prince/Princess, and also, determine that the DOS title cannot be inherited (as is the case for Edward’s DOE title).

      • Lauren says:

        He can remove the Prince/princess titles but the inheritance structure for a royal dukedom is set out in the document establishing the dukedom and can’t be changed

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        HRHs are styles, not titles.
        Titles are the Royal Duke/Royal Duchess titles, other aristo titles like Earl Spencer.

        Monarchs in Blighty control styles via Letters Patent.

        To remove the Ducal titles still requires an Act of Parliament.

    • Jamjam says:

      Only parliament can remove the dukedom but who is or isn’t a prince/princess is at the monarch’s personal discretion. If that happened, they would be an ordinary duke and duchess styled as His/Her Grace. Archie would be Earl of Dumbarton or Lord Kilkeel. (The heir can use any subsidiary title. It doesn’t have to be the most senior.) Lili would be The Lady Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor.

      • windyriver says:

        Sorry if the above sounded confusing. I don’t see anything happening to Harry’s title (never say never). But the article talked about Will removing HRH from H&M’s children and removing them from the succession, and that’s what I was really referring to, other actions that could potentially be taken with respect to them.

  6. sunniside up says:

    Andrew still has his titles. Taking Meghan’s would look like racism and taking Harry’s after assaulting and injuring him would look worse. They can be taken through Parliament. Last time was WWI when one of the royal dukes fought for the other side.

    • QuiteContrary says:

      Yeah, preserving Andrew’s titles while seeking the remove of the Sussexes’ titles would be terrible PRwise for William, so I could see him wanting to take Andrew’s, too. And that would serve a dual purpose of lumping in the Sussexes with Andrew, a favorite tabloid ploy.

      But William can’t take the titles on his own, as Sparkling Water points out. And a whole bunch of lords will object because if removing titles becomes a revenge tactic, their own lofty position becomes more precarious.

      • Texas Hold 'Em says:

        Again with this title business.

        It won’t matter if they don’t have titles! Their charisma and work ethic and love for one another and their children will still be there. And it will STILL outshine Pegs and Keen.

    • anotherlily says:

      Meghan’s title cannot be removed. It was never bestowed on her by the late Queen. She became Duchess of Sussex on her wedding day. It is the automatic right of any married woman in the UK who marries a titled man to take the female equivalent of his title. Hence, a woman who marries a ‘Mr’ becomes a ‘Mrs’. In formal circumstances she is Mrs Husband’s Full Name e.g Princess Anne’s daughter is Mrs Michael Tindall. This is what is written on her Ascot Royal Enclosure identification.

      The only exception is when a woman has a higher birth status than the man she marries e.g. Eugenie is formally named as Princess Eugenie, Mrs Jack Brooksbanks. I’m not sure if she uses HRH.

  7. ChillinginDC says:

    I will never understand why they keep pushing the titles thing and it’s especially stupid now that they are back in England.

  8. anotherlily says:

    The King cannot remove any royal dukedom. He can remove the HRH style, or at least ask a Prince or Princess not to use it. Legally, Andrew is still a Prince and still Duke of York. Only an Act of Parliament can remove a British dukedom and title of Prince. An attempt by the MP for York to introduce legislation to remove Andrew’s dukedom failed to get parliamentary support. I think there may currently be an attempt to remove Andrew from the succession.

    Harry has committed no criminal offence or engaged in any kind of behaviour that would put him in the same category as Andrew.

    I’m tired of reading these ignorant stories from press sources who have clearly done no research.

    • Mairzy Doats says:

      The system is based on bloodlines and birth order. Imagine if it were based instead on the merits of personalities, independent thought, exercising the right to live in their country, or perhaps suitability for the job one will inherit, such as work ethic, degree of interest in performing routine functions of the job, refusal to wear a kilt, blah blah. Parliament is very unlikely to go along with taking away titles from Harry and his children.

  9. Amy Bee says:

    Stripping Harry of his title, will have no affect in the attention that he and Meghan gets. In fact I think if William does take the title, it will make Harry and Meghan bigger. Just judging from the reaction to the news that they are returning to the UK shows that they are the biggest people in that family. Irrelevant people don’t get this much attention.

    • Where'sMyTiara says:

      Agreed, Amy. It is literally the last thing the system can hold over them as a threat. But title/style removal won’t alter Meghan and Harry’s standing globally by one jot.

      It literally doesn’t harm the Sussexes if the BRF insists on this action. If attempted, it will however have a deep, immediate, absolutely negative effect on the Crown and any and all agents of the Crown who facilitated this nonsense.

      • Lorelei says:

        💯. And people will always call them Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, just like everyone still says “Princess Diana” even though that was incorrect after the divorce. It won’t make a bit of difference and, if anything, will backfire on William somehow.

      • Graphinya Heather says:

        From what I understand, “Princess Diana” was incorrect during the marriage too. didn’t matter, she will always be Princess Diana.

  10. KristenfromMA says:

    Removing titles/styles does not remove charisma. In that regard, the Wales’ are outclassed and always will be.

    • Jais says:

      Bingo. The Wales and their low wattage approach, which is a burn from the WSJ, may have titles but that is not the same as charisma. Som people don’t need titles to get attention.

  11. Jferber says:

    Low wattage, dim bulb.

  12. 2131Jan says:

    William will still be the bully toddler who took the wombat from another kid (on the AU tour) and once he had it, threw it across the room). He is jealous of anyone who has something he has or thinks he wants. He will never “take away’ the Sussexes’ charm and charisma, their ease with others, their innate wanting to make the world better, to actually *help* people in a concrete way. The use their “celebrity”, their own money, and give their time, things “Don’t Want To” and his mate “Nope, Not Going To” (aka: “I HAD (pre) CANCER (cells)”) refuse to do. After all, all they can offer is good thoughts and a smile, or in Don’t’s case, a rictus grin.

  13. Beech says:

    “largely ignored”, oh really? Why can’t Willy keep his brother’s name out of his mouth? If for at least a minute.

  14. Sankay says:

    The Wall Street Journal is owned by the Murdochs. Enough said.
    And, William taking the titles away from the Sussexes will not get him what he wants but I’m sure he can’t be convinced of that.

  15. Lady Digby says:

    unshowy duty is what Britons want from their royal family!
    If only, heir would keep calm and carry on and carry out 500 engagements a year like his grandparents loyally did for decades. BM are desperate to compare brothers as in Harry flounced off to US leaving poor Will to carry the can dutifully at home! Trouble is the actual heir, which Harry has never been, has kept all the life of luxury but barely lifted a finger to keep the monarchy got. They can’t boast about William ‘s performance since 2020 because his already light schedule has progressively gotten lighter. To the consternation of all he didn’t take on any extra work when he become PoW in 2022 and when he was needed to steady the ship in 2024 he wanted just to put in a monthly appearance!

  16. MaisiesMom says:

    He can’t do that though, can he? And it would be a boneheaded move even if he could. Harry is Queen Elizabeth’s grandson. He’s a “Prince Of The Blood.” People would think William was a being a petty bully.

    Well, never mind.

  17. moldyoldy says:

    And as we all know, everyone stopped paying attention to Diana when she stopped using HRH …

    • Where'sMyTiara says:

      This is the precise point sailing unobserved over the heads of the entire palace-press industrial complex right now.

      WanK aren’t the only dim bulbs clamoring for headlines. These vultures on Fleet Street will do anything for a paycheck.

  18. Fredi says:

    We will indeed someday have a King William and Queen Catherine, but “Harry and Meghan” are bigger than their titles. He’ll ALWAYS be Prince Harry, and she’ll always be Meghan or Meghan Markle in the press and to millions of us. Branding is a beast 😉

  19. anotherlily says:

    The King has no power to act without Parliament. The only applicable legislation is the 1917 Titles Deprivation Act. (outlined below) This procedure was not followed in the case of Prince Andrew and no alternative legislation has been enacted.

    ———————————————————————–

    The Titles Deprivation Act 1917

    An Act to deprive Enemy Peers and Princes of British Dignities and Titles.

    ‘Be it enacted by the King’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

    Forfeiture of title of peer or prince held by enemy.

    His Majesty may appoint a committee of His Privy Council, of which two members at least shall be members of the Judicial Committee, to enquire into and report the names of any persons enjoying any dignity or title as a peer or British prince who have, during the present war, borne arms against His Majesty or His Allies, or who have adhered to His Majesty’s enemies.
    The Committee shall have power to take evidence on oath and to administer an oath for the purpose, and may, if they think fit, act upon any evidence given either orally or by affidavit based on information and belief, the grounds of which are stated.
    Such report shall be laid upon the table of both Houses of Parliament for the space of forty days, and, if by that time there has not been passed in either House a motion disapproving of the report, it shall be taken as final and presented to His Majesty.
    Where the name of any peer or prince is included in the report, then from and after the date of the presentation of the report to His Majesty-
    The name of such person, if he be a peer, shall be struck out of the Peerage Roll, and all rights of such peer to receive a writ of summons and to sit in the House of Lords or to take part in the election of representative peers shall cease and determine:
    All privileges and all rights to any dignity or title, whether in respect of a peerage or under any Royal Warrant or Letters Patent, shall cease and determine.

    Power of successor to petition for restoration of peerage.

    It shall be lawful for the successor of any peer whose name has been so removed, to present a petition to His Majesty praying to have the peerage restored and his name placed on the Peerage Roll; and His Majesty may refer such petition to a committee of the Privy Council constituted as aforesaid; and should the committee be satisfied that such person has incurred no disability under this Act, and is well affected to His Majesty’s Person and Government, His Majesty may thereupon direct that the peerage be restored and the name of the petitioner be placed on the Peerage Roll; whereupon all rights and privileges of the holder of the peerage shall revive and be in force as if the name of the peer had never been removed from the Roll.

    Savings
    Nothing in this Act shall affect the title or succession of any person to any estates or other property.
    The powers conferred upon His Majesty by this Act shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of, any other powers of His Majesty.
    Short title and definition
    This Act may be cited as the Titles Deprivation Act, 1917.
    In this Act the expression “enemy” shall be construed as referring to the enemies of His Majesty in the present war, and, for the purposes of this Act, a person shall be deemed to have adhered to His Majesty’s enemies if since the commencement of the present war he has voluntarily resided in an enemy country or if he has served in the enemy forces or in any way rendered assistance to the enemy’.

    ——————————————————————————-

  20. minx says:

    “Low-wattage,” I’m DYING!

  21. jferber says:

    Well, being lazy sucks, and they do eat up a lot of Britain’s resources. The only way to activate them is to rage-bait them with the Sussexes. And that is rather pitiful for the future king and queen of England. Pitiful and disgusting, really.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment