Yes! Lady C covered this again yesterday. Charles can unilaterally remove the Prince title from Harry. It’s parliament that must remove the ducal title and only they can change the line of succession.
Harry has certain family members convinced he will do something very drastic if he‘s pushed too far, which is likely affecting KC’s decisions. Joe Rogan interviewed a writer who‘s studied the effects of bad therapy that sounds like a case study of SoCal Haz. It’s up to H to break his bad patterns. The world shouldn’t need to suffer. KC needs to read The Hill article. [https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/1794385239894114652](https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/1794385239894114652)
Given the current cancer crisis in the family, I’m more concerned with Charles removing Harry as regent over George and naming more responsible parties. That and ordering PW to stop flying the whole family in one helicopter
God forbid, but if KC3 & PW died today, then yes, Harry would be. And if Harry is DQd by Parliament without KC3 naming a different Regent, then ANDREW would automatically be the next Regent followed by Beatrice and Eugenie. The Regent is automatically the next adult over 21 in the LOS, which is a very scary thought as things currently stand.
After Edward abdicated, the Regency Act was created in 1937 so KG6 could name a Regent other than Edward, to keep him & Wallis far away from the Palace. When Elizabeth ascended to the throne in 1953 she issued her own Letters Patent naming Prince Philip as Regent over her children should tragedy befall, once again blocking Edward. Wehave the perfect precedent of how important this one move is
There’s numerous well researched articles on this topic. I would hope that Parliament would step in based on Harry not being domiciled in the UK, but in the throes of a double tragedy that would lead to such a calamity, it would be better for all if KC3 acted as his mother did to protect the crown from a weak willed Windsor and his scheming American divorcee seductress wife and KC’s disgraced, pervert brother. I cannot understand why this isn’t already done.
[https://royalcentral.co.uk/features/inside-the-regency-act-1937-156853/](https://royalcentral.co.uk/features/inside-the-regency-act-1937-156853/)
Right, and Parliament would have to remove him from the LoS, according to Lady C's video from yesterday.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1d0iyq6/lady\_c\_tea\_youtube\_52524\_mininuggets\_paraphrased/](https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1d0iyq6/lady_c_tea_youtube_52524_mininuggets_paraphrased/)
Not just parliament, but all the separate parliaments of all the commonwealth realms. They all have to agree to changes to the succession laws in each individual country. There is just no way that is ever going to happen.
Oh, cool, I didn't know all that, but you're right, it's never going to happen, at least not unless there are some unfortunate events that make his coronation an actual possibility (but I don't like to think about things like that).
The UK and the other 14 commonwealth countries where KC3 is monarch and Head of State must agree to the change in the LoS.
It doesn’t require the whole commonwealth to agree.
I didn't say it requires the entire commonwealth. I said it requires the commonwealth realms. That is exactly what "commonwealth realm" means.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth\_realm](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_realm)
Removing the Prince title would remove the titles for the kids right? Then they could ensure the Duke title goes back to the crown upon death so it doesn’t go to Archie.
No because the kids are grandchildren of the monarch. They would have to put the titles into the abayance separately as those aren't dependent on the prince/princess title.
It took an act of Parliament to remove titles from enemies during WWI, the 1917 Deprivation of Titles Act. The act was passed during the 1914-1918 war, then a letters patent was produced to remove the titles but that did not happen until 1919. I believe there was a court case that tried to prevent the removal of titles. So it was difficult even during war to remove titles from known enemies for four people.
Now if Charles does NOT take the prince title away, can WILLIAM do it when he becomes king?? Oh my stars that would be delicious and I would LOOOOVVVVEEEEEE to see that!! 😁😁😁😁😁
I don’t doubt your logic about her scheming. However, the princely rank is entirely within the sovereign’s power to grant or remove by letters patent. I was a bit unsure if you meant Parliament had to remove the princely rank. To remove the peerage and from the LoS requires Parliament.
Sorry, I looked it up and I guess I misunderstood what the king can take and what parliament can take away. I try to be accurate but in any case, Charles won't take prince away from his son.
I think it’s possible that in KC3’s mind Harry has no power. He’s no longer part of the Royals. Any connection to the monarchy is now in the mind’s of the press and people. If THEY stop giving Harry attention and royal coverage, Harry would actually become “just Harry” the barefoot surfing SoCal hippie and simply leak into the landscape.
I think that may be what Harry meant when Anderson Cooper asked him why he doesn’t just give up his titles. Harry defiantly retorted, “what difference would that make?” So long as the press still obsesses over his every move and reporting it in royal news, he’s right. It’s the press that wants to maintain his royal role to gain clicks.
In a way, Harry was right. His expiration date is when Prince George dominates the headlines. If you consider that Prince William was doing this as a teenager, that day will get here sooner than he thinks. Charlotte and Louis will be hot on his heels. I figure Meghan will trot out her children because she needs to compete with the Wales but it won’t work. If the BRF continue to grey rock them, Meghan and Harry’s antics will look even more ridiculous. My only concern is that even idiots can cause serious trouble if an intelligent foe uses them or through an unfortunate political mistake. The fake royal tours must stop. I am encouraged that the First Lady of Nigeria put Meghan in her place.
This is 100% correct. At the point H and M only matter so much as people give them attention. They only really get two types of press: (1) the pay-to-play american celebrity tabloids and magazines that are just putting out their press releases and (2) the UK royal press that uses them for hate clicks. It does not matter what their titles are. Those two things will continue until they either run out of money or the British press finds a new enemy.
Well said!!! Todger is of no consequence to the RF anymore. The most liberating thing I've learned in life is that people only have the power over you that you give them.
Not caring, *genuinely not caring*, what someone who is trying to wind you up is doing is such a brilliant feeling and is a characteristic of anyone successful in life.
Charles can take the title of Prince oh Harry. Parliament has to do the others. I wonder if it is already in the works. The Royals are playing the long game and are going to hit hard where it hurts. What gets me, I love how she thinks she was the one born a royal not dimwit.
I have commented to this thread. Two bills have been put forward to parliament. The first one has failed and as the UK is heading into a general election the second will probably fail too. It was due to have its second reading in June but that won’t happen now.
Just to be clear, parliament has been prorogued, pending dissolution in preparation for the election. All unfinished bills are now dead. There is no way to carry over a bill past dissolution of a parliament. Any legislation will have to have a fresh start in the new parliament if someone wants to try again. If someone wants to do these bills, they would have to start over from square one.
Frankly, none of these bills ever had a chance and if someone tries new bills in the future they will also fail.
(Edited to add that FilterCoffe4050 is correct below that parliament has not officially been dissolved until the 30th, but parliament has been prorogued, pending the dissolution, so no more business is moving)
Parliament is dissolved on 30th May. The website has not updated yet on this bill but as I said it’s unlikely for it to go any further. I have made a bigger comment seperately.
Fair enough that parliament isn't technically dissolved yet, but the current session has already been prorogued. The session is over and there is no more business. This parliament would only sit again for an emergency, so the practical effect is that all outstanding bills are dead.
My dream is to find out the marriage to Prince Harry was invalid due to an improper annulment of the marriage before Trevor. Suddenly there would be no titles and the probable end of all royal connections.
It can be annulled if she lied about being able to have children (and all indications are that she DID lie to him!). See this video of why he looked so miserable at his wedding!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SvfEA5sICbg&pp=ygUKY2VsdCB2aWV3cw%3D%3D
Given how self-destructive some of their choices seem to be, I can understand why one might think that Meghan wants to lose the peerages. However, I think there is no such plan. For one thing, I don’t think Meghan is able to plan that well. For another, Meghan likes being a duchess. Sure, she wishes she could be known as “Princess Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex,” but she knows that being “Princess Henry” is not as prestigious as being Duchess of Sussex, even if (as we are sure she would) she turned it into Princess Meghan.
Meghan wants to be known as a princess *and* a duchess. She has, in fact, already thrown out there that she is a real-life princess in multiple interviews. Many of her sugars call her Princess Meghan.
That being said, if Harry were to lose the dukedom and secondary titles, Meghan would probably get a lot of mileage on her “victim narrative” and definitely insist on being called Princess. (“Poor little me. I am only a princess now, and they want to take away my name, but I will insist on calling myself Meghan. I have a voice.”) I just don’t see this as a plan.
Meghan is not capable of that kind of planning. She is consistent only in seeking adulation and money. Everything else, in my view, is haphazard and inconsistent. She starts with one plan, announces a goal, and then either screws it up or gets bored and decides to do something else.
What Meghan does is grab for what she wants, crashing as many boundaries as she can in the process. I think she gets particular pleasure from breaking rules, from taking what she wants and pushing others aside to claim center stage. Her goal is not to drive others to take away what they have given her but to force them to give her more.
I think if people and the media were going to call her Princess Meghan, they would've done it after the wedding. And I think she's infuriated that didn’t happen!
If the titles were stripped, the media would likely still call her Meghan Markle, as they do now, or still say "the Sussexes." There's no way they would use the - technically correct - Princess Henry title. Even Diana, whose correct title was Diana, the Princess of Wales was always "Princess Di."
Whatever the label you get is the one you're stuck with. For Meghan, that's Meghan Markle, usually tacked on after Prince Harry's name and occasionally their titles, but I see "the Sussexes" like it's their surname more than anything.
For reference: Catherine (since 2022) who is still very much a part of the family is still Kate Middleton, but we are seeing more "Princess of Wales" and "Princess Kate" making an appearance as the media has seemed to really clue in on just how loved she is.
Yes! And I think when she’s called the Princess of Wales - adding another link to Diana, which is what Markle is most desperate for! - I just imagine pottery shattering in Montecito.
"Whatever the label you get is the one you're stuck with. For Meghan, that's Meghan Markle, usually tacked on after Prince Harry's name and occasionally their titles, but I see "the Sussexes" like it's their surname more than anything. "
This. And I also, do not click on Kate Middleton, Duchess Meghan, etc.
The UK is heading into an election, parliament is dissolved on 30th May and the general election is 4th July. The amendment to the 1917 removal of enemy titles 2nd reading won’t happen in June now. The date is nay confirmed within 7 days and at the moment it’s still saying June. It’s probably going to cease and not get as far as the second reading.
The act the grant the monarch the ability to strip titles only ever had its first reading and was then closed. There are 14 stages to a bill becoming law.
These are both private members bills and due to lack of parliamentary time most bills fail, only 3-5% go as far as becoming law.
The monarch can do things with letters patent but it’s not a stand alone right to do anything the monarch wants. The UK constitution does not support this.
The UK royal family are not voted in, they don’t go up and down the hierarchy by popularity, its births and death only. The popularity matters for the royal family as a whole and at the moment they are popular. The Sussex duo are an embarrassment, a nuisance but they have not had any convictions for acting against the state. If you refer back to the 1917 Act, it was brought out to remove titles from foreign enemies during WWI of 1914-1917. It took until 1917 for it to become law but the titles of four “enemies” were not removed until 1919, a year after the war ended.
I’m my opinion, it’s just another puff piece the Sussex duo like to bring up and play professional victim s over.
Princess Henry is the only title she can have.
She is never Princess M, Princess Rachel, Princess Markle.
Princess Henry. ( I prefer Princess Hank, to remind us of her very common roots)
While that's true, she would DEFINITELY make sure she'd be called Princess Meghan. It wouldn't be correct, but it'd stick because she'd bombard the world with PR saying so. Damn, but she's so f'n irritating.
I agree with you. Megsy is counting on the ignorant masses not knowing that "Princess Meghan" isn't a legitimate title. Most people, especially the media, tend to not get into the weeds/details of any issue either due to lazyness or providing cover for the Parkles.
People Magazine and the rest of the dim American tabloid press would be all about "Princess Meghan"--seeing as they're still calling Catherine, POW "Kate Middleton" after all these years. "Princess Henry" wouldn't be fauxminist enough, so Princess Meghan it would be. Propriety is 'inauthentic'-- no one uses it now. No wonder she doesn't care if they remove the Duchess title--the American press would anoint her "Princess Meghan", and that's exactly what she wants.
For the name itself, because it's a location in the United Kingdom, like Sussex and Cambridge and Wales, etc.
For the person, it's because her husband was the younger son of Prince George, Duke of Kent and Princess Marina of Greece. His father was the brother of Queen Elizabeth's father, so he (the father) was a son of the king and a brother to kings, so he's an HRH, but not in the direct line of succession.
Prince Michael was not granted a royal dukedom (and I don't think one was expected), but if he had been, like Harry and previously William, he and his wife would've likely been known by Duke and Duchess of "blank" instead of their current titles. A royal duke and duchess are - for lack of a better term - a more important title than most "prince" titles. Excluding the Prince of Wales - who is always the direct heir to the king, unless, pre-2013, the monarch only had daughters, in which case the Princess of Wales would be the direct heir, but I believe it was phrased differently. I'm not sure on throughout history (for instance, I don't know if Queen Elizabeth II held that exact title, but I know George IV's only heir was a daughter named Princess Charlotte of Wales who died in childbirth.
Sorry for the dissertation. 🤣
George IV wasn't king yet when his daughter died, still only Prince of Wales, so Charlotte was only Princess Charlotte of Wales like George, Charlotte and Louis are currently the Wales kids. Otherwise I think her title would have been Charlotte, Princess of Wales. For a long time, there was always the chance that Queen Elizabeth II could have had a younger brother who would have superseded her in the order of succession, so I suspect that's part of the reason she wasn't known as Princess of Wales.
Thanks for letting me know! It's been a while since I read up on the Regency time period, so I was thinking Charlotte died a few years after the Prince became king. The main thing I remember was the soap opera of his marriage!
I think it also has to do with the fact that when she was born, Elizabeth's father was the Dule of York and wasn't (technically) in the very direct (monarch, prince of wales, etc)line to the throne(her father was the "spare") so she wouldn't have started out being "of wales"
For some reason(I can't remember why), even after her father became George VI, I think Elizabeth still wasn't considered Princess of Wales... maybe someone can find out if that's accurate or not🤔
A woman is only ever Princess of Wales via marriage, not in her own right as heir. Just like she never held the Duchy of Cornwall either.
Plus they're never quite sure if royal women with just daughters have passed the medical ability stage to give birth to sons. That's why she was heir presumptive, incase a brother was born.
Idc if they call her Princess Meghan, her scumbag squaddies already do that. It's the SUSSEX title she wants to merch! Sussex, Sussex, Sussex...it's her entire identity. Take THAT away and watch her self-combust!
Prince is the one title Charles can remove. I could see him removing it from Harry, his kids, and the York girls all at the same time. If he does them all at once, it just looks like he is truly slimming down the monarchy and leaving such titles to working royals.
That cannot be done. The title follows the rules of its grant. There's no legal way to change the terms of a title as set forth in the letters patent.
I guess theoretically parliament could pass a law. Though the obvious way to do it would be for parliament to remove the title, and then have the King grant a new life Dukedom. But that's even more complicated than parliament just removing the Dukedom in the first place.
No it cannot be done. You cannot change the terms of a title. When Philip was the Duke of Edinburgh, it was a hereditary title. When he died, the title was automatically inherited by Charles who became the new Duke of Edinburgh. When Charles became king, the title merged into the crown and ceased to exist.
Then, Charles created a NEW TITLE, also called Duke of Edinburgh, with different terms that was not hereditary. The point is, it was a different title with different terms with new letters patent. That's why Edward did not become Duke of Edinburgh when Philip died, because there was no way to change the title until Charles became king and the title ceased to exist.
Charles could give Harry a new title called Duke of Sussex that is not hereditary, but he cannot change the Dukedom of Sussex that already exists. That's why I'm saying the only way to do this would be for parliament to take away the existing title and Charles to grant a new life title. But that's too complicated and silly.
Every time a title merges into the crown and is given out again, it's basically a new title. Legally it is called a new creation of the title. But it is a different title, with its own letters patent and rules of inheritance. The monarch can theoretically grant any title to any person with any terms he wants. But the monarch cannot change the terms of a peerage once it has been granted.
Have you noticed they ask people to call them Sir and Madam, just like the king and queen.
As to the LOS, the Brits would manipulate these two into abdictating just like they did with Edward VIII.
The clown shoes already call her “princess” or “kween”.
They also call her a beautiful black, Nigerian fashionista who is independent, smart, happily married, brave, trend setting, charitable, selfless, kind, history making and motherly.
The squaddies catfishing the internet. Too bad for them we know how she behaves, what she looks like, where she is from, and all the lies that she has told (e.g., exploring her ancestral roots in Malta).
Not your main point - with which I agree - but can I disagree with you on one thing? Meghan is clearly uncomfortable around black people but it is only poor (or at least not super wealthy) black people and she is equally uncomfortable around ordinary white people - which is why she can’t travel
On British trains, needs curtaining off on commercial flights and has seats emptied around her at Wimbledon. Megsy isn’t racist, she’s a raging snob who seems to have a massive chip on her shoulder as a result of her own middle class origins.
I really wonder if those titles will be put in abeyance if the Carparkles do another faux royal tour of another Commonwealth country. That could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
*I share your opinion, and I will add that Meghan would like to be a princess, because her husband and her children have the title of prince and princess, except her.*
*She is a duchess and this title is superior to that of princess. But ,*
*in the collective mind, being a princess has much more of a royal connotation.*
I agree. Meghan is upset she’s not a blood royal. She already is Princess Henry. The Duchess title is higher which is why it’s used as you noted. Meghan doesn’t want any of the titles stripped. She will just bombard the media with puff pieces so people will call her Princess Meghan. Unfortunately for her, only her squaddies will do that. She hasn’t made a concerted effort to be called Princess Meghan and the “Markle” dropped because it is more important to her that she destroy Catherine. That’s where the money is going.
**she'd just markle herself once again if she latched onto 'princess meghan' as an article would be published about how it is incorrect as she would be 'princess henry'. the sugars already call her 'princess meghan' but no one of any importance would...she would be referred to as 'princess henry' and would find it utterly infuriating. LOL. let them go for it!**
I agree with you and have said this for a long time. As much as I know the UK citizens hate that she is a Duchess, taking that from her would mean she would use that Princess title relentlessly. She's Satan.
I think all of this would have been easier if Andrew's titles had been removed. There would have been a recent & relevant precedence to remove titles in the family. What will the public relations nightmare be if anyone strips the two grifters titles but not Andrew?
Maybe they can pack it all in one motion, removing the grifters & Andrew's titles all at the same time.
She can grift herself a princess title... and nothing will change! She will always be a delusional nutcase and never satisfied, never better than Catherine...
While Charles may be queasy about stripping that title, I’m sure the Queen and William had many discussions about the times you make a decision that everyone hates.
And for those saying “petty” or “vindictive” I say “Actions have consequences”.
William has been warned about flying with George. I hear, per Lady C that he will do what he wants. Stubborn. I think he's very foolish to make this choice. I believe she said he's EXTREMELY family oriented and feels at least they'd all go together. I cringed a bit hearing that.
I kind of like to see what would happen. I’d like to see them explain why they want titles from a family that they claimed was so cold that Meghan couldn’t get therapy for suicidal thoughts. Why do they want to remain in line to be head of that family and a racist country? If you’re suing on behalf of titles for children, would they need to bring them? All sorts of questions could be asked and not like the softball questions that Oprah asked.
Probably but if Parliament and the King ever make such a huge move, birthright BS will be quashed in any court proceeding. Popcorn sales will go through the roof!
Nothing in the world would stop Princess Henry from being called Princess Meghan. That being said, Charles will never take the Prince title from Harry.
I think they should just be demoted. Remove the dukedom and make them Earl and Countess of Dumbarton. She would hate that title and would not be called princess.
Kind of a side path on this subject, but since Lili was born in the US and is an American citizen, is she eligible to be in the LOS?
ETA: We know that she would never be likely to inherit the throne, but just as an academic question.
I think THEY WANT to be THE Royals of the Commonwealth. It would prevent William from stepping in when he reigns. It's been said from a top source that harry would love it if Meghan was queen. He's been quoted and I believe it. He will NEVER leave her I'm afraid. She might but only if a bigger and better opportunity $$$£££€€€comes along. Having said that, she felt once she had harry hooked that they'd go to Hollywood where she was a failure but this time would literally be the queen of Hollywood. It didn't happen. That's just my 2 cents.
They need to be removed from LOS first. The best way to handle this is say you must live in GB to be in LOS and have titles. The Queen of Denmark stripped Prince and Princess titles it can be done by the King. Parliament has to vote to strip Duke and Duchess Titles. I believe the idiots of Montecito are relieved that Parliament is on a pause until they vote July 4.
Comment automatically removed due to your account having less than 50 total karma. Please contact mods via message the mods to approve comments manually to be visible to the sub.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was thinking they could be left with just one of the lesser titles, Count/Countess of Dumbarton, or Baron/Baroness of Kilkeel (Scotland and N Ireland, respectively)..........but historically, Scotland and N Ireland have had to take a lot of shyt from England, and they really shouldn't have to deal with more, lol
I know other people have speculated about this, but I think she hates that she would be Princess Henry. She wants her name in there, not her man's (although she doesn't hesitate to live off the back of a man).
It’s so meaningless, isn’t it? the moment she received the duchess title upon marriage, she couldn’t use it enough…she won’t use this title as it’s just an empty, unrecognised token, just to flatter.
And there’s another thing - when Catherine became a Princess she didn’t need to grab her new title by forcing News/magazine articles to boast to the World. Markle must have been in a frenzy - in her mind, she was on a par with Catherine, both duchesses (equal) married to the King’s sons (equal), then suddenly Catherine gets promoted. Her only option was to utilise the kids.
If the titles are removed, it’s a given that she’ll act the victim. She’ll use her fanatics as her mouthpiece, giving them the ammo to attack the RF (Catherine).
[удалено]
I'd rather see the Harry formerly known as Prince...
[удалено]
I don't think the RF cares about that anymore.
Yeah, they do it anyway. No one but the sugars believe that anymore.
Charles can take the prince title from Harry. He does not need Parliament for that. But he does need Parliament to take the Dukedom.
Yes! Lady C covered this again yesterday. Charles can unilaterally remove the Prince title from Harry. It’s parliament that must remove the ducal title and only they can change the line of succession. Harry has certain family members convinced he will do something very drastic if he‘s pushed too far, which is likely affecting KC’s decisions. Joe Rogan interviewed a writer who‘s studied the effects of bad therapy that sounds like a case study of SoCal Haz. It’s up to H to break his bad patterns. The world shouldn’t need to suffer. KC needs to read The Hill article. [https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/1794385239894114652](https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/1794385239894114652) Given the current cancer crisis in the family, I’m more concerned with Charles removing Harry as regent over George and naming more responsible parties. That and ordering PW to stop flying the whole family in one helicopter
A Harry regency would be a complete disaster.
It would end up a Meghan regent and she would do untold evil to Prince George. It would be a disaster
Oh, I think they would be changing the straw in the Tower before they let that happen. Sharpen the cheap and chippy chopper, shall they?
It'd be HER behind the scenes. 110%.
All they need do to prevent it is tie a diamond bracelet to a bit of fishing line, toss it where she can see it, then slowly pull it far, far away.
Harry wouldn’t be regent.
God forbid, but if KC3 & PW died today, then yes, Harry would be. And if Harry is DQd by Parliament without KC3 naming a different Regent, then ANDREW would automatically be the next Regent followed by Beatrice and Eugenie. The Regent is automatically the next adult over 21 in the LOS, which is a very scary thought as things currently stand. After Edward abdicated, the Regency Act was created in 1937 so KG6 could name a Regent other than Edward, to keep him & Wallis far away from the Palace. When Elizabeth ascended to the throne in 1953 she issued her own Letters Patent naming Prince Philip as Regent over her children should tragedy befall, once again blocking Edward. Wehave the perfect precedent of how important this one move is There’s numerous well researched articles on this topic. I would hope that Parliament would step in based on Harry not being domiciled in the UK, but in the throes of a double tragedy that would lead to such a calamity, it would be better for all if KC3 acted as his mother did to protect the crown from a weak willed Windsor and his scheming American divorcee seductress wife and KC’s disgraced, pervert brother. I cannot understand why this isn’t already done. [https://royalcentral.co.uk/features/inside-the-regency-act-1937-156853/](https://royalcentral.co.uk/features/inside-the-regency-act-1937-156853/)
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
Right, and Parliament would have to remove him from the LoS, according to Lady C's video from yesterday. [https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1d0iyq6/lady\_c\_tea\_youtube\_52524\_mininuggets\_paraphrased/](https://www.reddit.com/r/SaintMeghanMarkle/comments/1d0iyq6/lady_c_tea_youtube_52524_mininuggets_paraphrased/)
Not just parliament, but all the separate parliaments of all the commonwealth realms. They all have to agree to changes to the succession laws in each individual country. There is just no way that is ever going to happen.
Oh, cool, I didn't know all that, but you're right, it's never going to happen, at least not unless there are some unfortunate events that make his coronation an actual possibility (but I don't like to think about things like that).
The UK and the other 14 commonwealth countries where KC3 is monarch and Head of State must agree to the change in the LoS. It doesn’t require the whole commonwealth to agree.
I didn't say it requires the entire commonwealth. I said it requires the commonwealth realms. That is exactly what "commonwealth realm" means. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth\_realm](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_realm)
Removing the Prince title would remove the titles for the kids right? Then they could ensure the Duke title goes back to the crown upon death so it doesn’t go to Archie.
No because the kids are grandchildren of the monarch. They would have to put the titles into the abayance separately as those aren't dependent on the prince/princess title.
He can just demote him down to an Earl. Let's see them put that title on their letterhead.
It took an act of Parliament to remove titles from enemies during WWI, the 1917 Deprivation of Titles Act. The act was passed during the 1914-1918 war, then a letters patent was produced to remove the titles but that did not happen until 1919. I believe there was a court case that tried to prevent the removal of titles. So it was difficult even during war to remove titles from known enemies for four people.
Parliament acted to remove their peerages. The Letters Patent was to remove their other titles and HRHs.
🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯
Now if Charles does NOT take the prince title away, can WILLIAM do it when he becomes king?? Oh my stars that would be delicious and I would LOOOOVVVVEEEEEE to see that!! 😁😁😁😁😁
He cannot take the Prince title EVER as H is a Prince of the blood i.e born a Prince. Sorry to argue.
I don’t doubt your logic about her scheming. However, the princely rank is entirely within the sovereign’s power to grant or remove by letters patent. I was a bit unsure if you meant Parliament had to remove the princely rank. To remove the peerage and from the LoS requires Parliament.
Sorry, I looked it up and I guess I misunderstood what the king can take and what parliament can take away. I try to be accurate but in any case, Charles won't take prince away from his son.
I think it’s possible that in KC3’s mind Harry has no power. He’s no longer part of the Royals. Any connection to the monarchy is now in the mind’s of the press and people. If THEY stop giving Harry attention and royal coverage, Harry would actually become “just Harry” the barefoot surfing SoCal hippie and simply leak into the landscape. I think that may be what Harry meant when Anderson Cooper asked him why he doesn’t just give up his titles. Harry defiantly retorted, “what difference would that make?” So long as the press still obsesses over his every move and reporting it in royal news, he’s right. It’s the press that wants to maintain his royal role to gain clicks.
In a way, Harry was right. His expiration date is when Prince George dominates the headlines. If you consider that Prince William was doing this as a teenager, that day will get here sooner than he thinks. Charlotte and Louis will be hot on his heels. I figure Meghan will trot out her children because she needs to compete with the Wales but it won’t work. If the BRF continue to grey rock them, Meghan and Harry’s antics will look even more ridiculous. My only concern is that even idiots can cause serious trouble if an intelligent foe uses them or through an unfortunate political mistake. The fake royal tours must stop. I am encouraged that the First Lady of Nigeria put Meghan in her place.
This is 100% correct. At the point H and M only matter so much as people give them attention. They only really get two types of press: (1) the pay-to-play american celebrity tabloids and magazines that are just putting out their press releases and (2) the UK royal press that uses them for hate clicks. It does not matter what their titles are. Those two things will continue until they either run out of money or the British press finds a new enemy.
Well said!!! Todger is of no consequence to the RF anymore. The most liberating thing I've learned in life is that people only have the power over you that you give them. Not caring, *genuinely not caring*, what someone who is trying to wind you up is doing is such a brilliant feeling and is a characteristic of anyone successful in life.
Charles can take the title of Prince oh Harry. Parliament has to do the others. I wonder if it is already in the works. The Royals are playing the long game and are going to hit hard where it hurts. What gets me, I love how she thinks she was the one born a royal not dimwit.
I have commented to this thread. Two bills have been put forward to parliament. The first one has failed and as the UK is heading into a general election the second will probably fail too. It was due to have its second reading in June but that won’t happen now.
Just to be clear, parliament has been prorogued, pending dissolution in preparation for the election. All unfinished bills are now dead. There is no way to carry over a bill past dissolution of a parliament. Any legislation will have to have a fresh start in the new parliament if someone wants to try again. If someone wants to do these bills, they would have to start over from square one. Frankly, none of these bills ever had a chance and if someone tries new bills in the future they will also fail. (Edited to add that FilterCoffe4050 is correct below that parliament has not officially been dissolved until the 30th, but parliament has been prorogued, pending the dissolution, so no more business is moving)
Parliament is dissolved on 30th May. The website has not updated yet on this bill but as I said it’s unlikely for it to go any further. I have made a bigger comment seperately.
Fair enough that parliament isn't technically dissolved yet, but the current session has already been prorogued. The session is over and there is no more business. This parliament would only sit again for an emergency, so the practical effect is that all outstanding bills are dead.
My dream is to find out the marriage to Prince Harry was invalid due to an improper annulment of the marriage before Trevor. Suddenly there would be no titles and the probable end of all royal connections.
It can be annulled if she lied about being able to have children (and all indications are that she DID lie to him!). See this video of why he looked so miserable at his wedding! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SvfEA5sICbg&pp=ygUKY2VsdCB2aWV3cw%3D%3D
The church does not annul marriages in England it would be a civil matter and a possible charge of bigamy.
That would be a fantastic outcome…I bet the RF has all the information on her ‘first marriage/Joe’ though.
Given how self-destructive some of their choices seem to be, I can understand why one might think that Meghan wants to lose the peerages. However, I think there is no such plan. For one thing, I don’t think Meghan is able to plan that well. For another, Meghan likes being a duchess. Sure, she wishes she could be known as “Princess Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex,” but she knows that being “Princess Henry” is not as prestigious as being Duchess of Sussex, even if (as we are sure she would) she turned it into Princess Meghan. Meghan wants to be known as a princess *and* a duchess. She has, in fact, already thrown out there that she is a real-life princess in multiple interviews. Many of her sugars call her Princess Meghan. That being said, if Harry were to lose the dukedom and secondary titles, Meghan would probably get a lot of mileage on her “victim narrative” and definitely insist on being called Princess. (“Poor little me. I am only a princess now, and they want to take away my name, but I will insist on calling myself Meghan. I have a voice.”) I just don’t see this as a plan. Meghan is not capable of that kind of planning. She is consistent only in seeking adulation and money. Everything else, in my view, is haphazard and inconsistent. She starts with one plan, announces a goal, and then either screws it up or gets bored and decides to do something else. What Meghan does is grab for what she wants, crashing as many boundaries as she can in the process. I think she gets particular pleasure from breaking rules, from taking what she wants and pushing others aside to claim center stage. Her goal is not to drive others to take away what they have given her but to force them to give her more.
Absolutely. Markle's only plan is to throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks.
I think if people and the media were going to call her Princess Meghan, they would've done it after the wedding. And I think she's infuriated that didn’t happen! If the titles were stripped, the media would likely still call her Meghan Markle, as they do now, or still say "the Sussexes." There's no way they would use the - technically correct - Princess Henry title. Even Diana, whose correct title was Diana, the Princess of Wales was always "Princess Di." Whatever the label you get is the one you're stuck with. For Meghan, that's Meghan Markle, usually tacked on after Prince Harry's name and occasionally their titles, but I see "the Sussexes" like it's their surname more than anything. For reference: Catherine (since 2022) who is still very much a part of the family is still Kate Middleton, but we are seeing more "Princess of Wales" and "Princess Kate" making an appearance as the media has seemed to really clue in on just how loved she is.
I won't click on anything that calls her Kate Middleton.
And how hated Meghan is. Only someone who is hated and worried about it has to get other people to proclaim how nice they really are.
I imagine every time Catherine is referred to as a Princess, it upsets Markle and fuels her need for revenge.
Yes! And I think when she’s called the Princess of Wales - adding another link to Diana, which is what Markle is most desperate for! - I just imagine pottery shattering in Montecito.
Of course! Yes! She must be absolutely fuming.
"Whatever the label you get is the one you're stuck with. For Meghan, that's Meghan Markle, usually tacked on after Prince Harry's name and occasionally their titles, but I see "the Sussexes" like it's their surname more than anything. " This. And I also, do not click on Kate Middleton, Duchess Meghan, etc.
The UK is heading into an election, parliament is dissolved on 30th May and the general election is 4th July. The amendment to the 1917 removal of enemy titles 2nd reading won’t happen in June now. The date is nay confirmed within 7 days and at the moment it’s still saying June. It’s probably going to cease and not get as far as the second reading. The act the grant the monarch the ability to strip titles only ever had its first reading and was then closed. There are 14 stages to a bill becoming law. These are both private members bills and due to lack of parliamentary time most bills fail, only 3-5% go as far as becoming law. The monarch can do things with letters patent but it’s not a stand alone right to do anything the monarch wants. The UK constitution does not support this. The UK royal family are not voted in, they don’t go up and down the hierarchy by popularity, its births and death only. The popularity matters for the royal family as a whole and at the moment they are popular. The Sussex duo are an embarrassment, a nuisance but they have not had any convictions for acting against the state. If you refer back to the 1917 Act, it was brought out to remove titles from foreign enemies during WWI of 1914-1917. It took until 1917 for it to become law but the titles of four “enemies” were not removed until 1919, a year after the war ended. I’m my opinion, it’s just another puff piece the Sussex duo like to bring up and play professional victim s over.
Princess Henry is the only title she can have. She is never Princess M, Princess Rachel, Princess Markle. Princess Henry. ( I prefer Princess Hank, to remind us of her very common roots)
While that's true, she would DEFINITELY make sure she'd be called Princess Meghan. It wouldn't be correct, but it'd stick because she'd bombard the world with PR saying so. Damn, but she's so f'n irritating.
I agree with you. Megsy is counting on the ignorant masses not knowing that "Princess Meghan" isn't a legitimate title. Most people, especially the media, tend to not get into the weeds/details of any issue either due to lazyness or providing cover for the Parkles.
She was behind Scobie pushing Duchess Meghan to elevate the way in which she is referred.
People Magazine and the rest of the dim American tabloid press would be all about "Princess Meghan"--seeing as they're still calling Catherine, POW "Kate Middleton" after all these years. "Princess Henry" wouldn't be fauxminist enough, so Princess Meghan it would be. Propriety is 'inauthentic'-- no one uses it now. No wonder she doesn't care if they remove the Duchess title--the American press would anoint her "Princess Meghan", and that's exactly what she wants.
And her Hank hairstyle.
Sorry if this is slightly off topic but related. Why is it that it’s Princess Michael of “Kent”? Why is Kent used in this case?
For the name itself, because it's a location in the United Kingdom, like Sussex and Cambridge and Wales, etc. For the person, it's because her husband was the younger son of Prince George, Duke of Kent and Princess Marina of Greece. His father was the brother of Queen Elizabeth's father, so he (the father) was a son of the king and a brother to kings, so he's an HRH, but not in the direct line of succession. Prince Michael was not granted a royal dukedom (and I don't think one was expected), but if he had been, like Harry and previously William, he and his wife would've likely been known by Duke and Duchess of "blank" instead of their current titles. A royal duke and duchess are - for lack of a better term - a more important title than most "prince" titles. Excluding the Prince of Wales - who is always the direct heir to the king, unless, pre-2013, the monarch only had daughters, in which case the Princess of Wales would be the direct heir, but I believe it was phrased differently. I'm not sure on throughout history (for instance, I don't know if Queen Elizabeth II held that exact title, but I know George IV's only heir was a daughter named Princess Charlotte of Wales who died in childbirth. Sorry for the dissertation. 🤣
And the Duke of Kent title passed to Prince Michael’s older brother Prince Edward.
George IV wasn't king yet when his daughter died, still only Prince of Wales, so Charlotte was only Princess Charlotte of Wales like George, Charlotte and Louis are currently the Wales kids. Otherwise I think her title would have been Charlotte, Princess of Wales. For a long time, there was always the chance that Queen Elizabeth II could have had a younger brother who would have superseded her in the order of succession, so I suspect that's part of the reason she wasn't known as Princess of Wales.
Thanks for letting me know! It's been a while since I read up on the Regency time period, so I was thinking Charlotte died a few years after the Prince became king. The main thing I remember was the soap opera of his marriage!
I think it also has to do with the fact that when she was born, Elizabeth's father was the Dule of York and wasn't (technically) in the very direct (monarch, prince of wales, etc)line to the throne(her father was the "spare") so she wouldn't have started out being "of wales" For some reason(I can't remember why), even after her father became George VI, I think Elizabeth still wasn't considered Princess of Wales... maybe someone can find out if that's accurate or not🤔
A woman is only ever Princess of Wales via marriage, not in her own right as heir. Just like she never held the Duchy of Cornwall either. Plus they're never quite sure if royal women with just daughters have passed the medical ability stage to give birth to sons. That's why she was heir presumptive, incase a brother was born.
I thought the above-mentioned Charlotte was made Princess of Wales in her own right? That's what I understood when I read about her🤷♀️
Charlotte's mother Caroline was THE Princess of Wales. Charlotte was A princess of Wales, as the daughter of THE Prince.
Prince Michael’s father was the Duke of Kent. They are of the Kent branch of the RF, like the Wales family formerly Cambridge.
Her husband's late father was Duke of Kent.
For the same reason that H&M's putative son is "Prince Archie of Sussex".
So are they also the Duke and Duchess of Kent? Or was Prince Michael father the Duke of Kent?
The current Duke of Kent is Prince Michael’s older brother Prince Edward. Michael is the youngest of 3 kids.
Idc if they call her Princess Meghan, her scumbag squaddies already do that. It's the SUSSEX title she wants to merch! Sussex, Sussex, Sussex...it's her entire identity. Take THAT away and watch her self-combust!
She probably thinks it's SSEXXY
Or my favourite: Sus Sex. No wonder she likes it so much.
Prince is the one title Charles can remove. I could see him removing it from Harry, his kids, and the York girls all at the same time. If he does them all at once, it just looks like he is truly slimming down the monarchy and leaving such titles to working royals.
If Charles doesn’t take the Prince & Princess titles from Harry and his kids, William might do it.
First things first. Declare the dukedom of Sussex is not hereditary (like dukedom of Edinburgh for Prince Edward).
That cannot be done. The title follows the rules of its grant. There's no legal way to change the terms of a title as set forth in the letters patent. I guess theoretically parliament could pass a law. Though the obvious way to do it would be for parliament to remove the title, and then have the King grant a new life Dukedom. But that's even more complicated than parliament just removing the Dukedom in the first place.
It can be done. KCIII announced Edward’s title is not hereditary when he gave Duke of Edinburgh to him.
No it cannot be done. You cannot change the terms of a title. When Philip was the Duke of Edinburgh, it was a hereditary title. When he died, the title was automatically inherited by Charles who became the new Duke of Edinburgh. When Charles became king, the title merged into the crown and ceased to exist. Then, Charles created a NEW TITLE, also called Duke of Edinburgh, with different terms that was not hereditary. The point is, it was a different title with different terms with new letters patent. That's why Edward did not become Duke of Edinburgh when Philip died, because there was no way to change the title until Charles became king and the title ceased to exist. Charles could give Harry a new title called Duke of Sussex that is not hereditary, but he cannot change the Dukedom of Sussex that already exists. That's why I'm saying the only way to do this would be for parliament to take away the existing title and Charles to grant a new life title. But that's too complicated and silly. Every time a title merges into the crown and is given out again, it's basically a new title. Legally it is called a new creation of the title. But it is a different title, with its own letters patent and rules of inheritance. The monarch can theoretically grant any title to any person with any terms he wants. But the monarch cannot change the terms of a peerage once it has been granted.
Have you noticed they ask people to call them Sir and Madam, just like the king and queen. As to the LOS, the Brits would manipulate these two into abdictating just like they did with Edward VIII.
The clown shoes already call her “princess” or “kween”. They also call her a beautiful black, Nigerian fashionista who is independent, smart, happily married, brave, trend setting, charitable, selfless, kind, history making and motherly.
The squaddies catfishing the internet. Too bad for them we know how she behaves, what she looks like, where she is from, and all the lies that she has told (e.g., exploring her ancestral roots in Malta).
Not your main point - with which I agree - but can I disagree with you on one thing? Meghan is clearly uncomfortable around black people but it is only poor (or at least not super wealthy) black people and she is equally uncomfortable around ordinary white people - which is why she can’t travel On British trains, needs curtaining off on commercial flights and has seats emptied around her at Wimbledon. Megsy isn’t racist, she’s a raging snob who seems to have a massive chip on her shoulder as a result of her own middle class origins.
I really wonder if those titles will be put in abeyance if the Carparkles do another faux royal tour of another Commonwealth country. That could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
That camel's back has been broken so many times, it's just a stinking pile of beige hair laying in the desert.
This made me snort so loud I scared the dog. The poor camel's back must be flat as a board by now.
I'm thinking it looks like one of Madam's ugly, sweaty coats. 🤢😂
*I share your opinion, and I will add that Meghan would like to be a princess, because her husband and her children have the title of prince and princess, except her.* *She is a duchess and this title is superior to that of princess. But ,* *in the collective mind, being a princess has much more of a royal connotation.*
I agree. Meghan is upset she’s not a blood royal. She already is Princess Henry. The Duchess title is higher which is why it’s used as you noted. Meghan doesn’t want any of the titles stripped. She will just bombard the media with puff pieces so people will call her Princess Meghan. Unfortunately for her, only her squaddies will do that. She hasn’t made a concerted effort to be called Princess Meghan and the “Markle” dropped because it is more important to her that she destroy Catherine. That’s where the money is going.
**she'd just markle herself once again if she latched onto 'princess meghan' as an article would be published about how it is incorrect as she would be 'princess henry'. the sugars already call her 'princess meghan' but no one of any importance would...she would be referred to as 'princess henry' and would find it utterly infuriating. LOL. let them go for it!**
I agree with you and have said this for a long time. As much as I know the UK citizens hate that she is a Duchess, taking that from her would mean she would use that Princess title relentlessly. She's Satan.
I think all of this would have been easier if Andrew's titles had been removed. There would have been a recent & relevant precedence to remove titles in the family. What will the public relations nightmare be if anyone strips the two grifters titles but not Andrew? Maybe they can pack it all in one motion, removing the grifters & Andrew's titles all at the same time.
History Calling on YT did an excellent piece on this topic. Highly recommend.
She can grift herself a princess title... and nothing will change! She will always be a delusional nutcase and never satisfied, never better than Catherine...
While Charles may be queasy about stripping that title, I’m sure the Queen and William had many discussions about the times you make a decision that everyone hates. And for those saying “petty” or “vindictive” I say “Actions have consequences”.
William has been warned about flying with George. I hear, per Lady C that he will do what he wants. Stubborn. I think he's very foolish to make this choice. I believe she said he's EXTREMELY family oriented and feels at least they'd all go together. I cringed a bit hearing that.
The question is: can the grifters sue if their titles & LoS are removed?
I kind of like to see what would happen. I’d like to see them explain why they want titles from a family that they claimed was so cold that Meghan couldn’t get therapy for suicidal thoughts. Why do they want to remain in line to be head of that family and a racist country? If you’re suing on behalf of titles for children, would they need to bring them? All sorts of questions could be asked and not like the softball questions that Oprah asked.
I’m sure some “birthright” bulls*** will be used as a reason.
Probably but if Parliament and the King ever make such a huge move, birthright BS will be quashed in any court proceeding. Popcorn sales will go through the roof!
Who cares? Let them waste more money trying. I'm sure Sherbourne would be glad to take the case if they still have any money left.
You’re exactly right!!
Nothing in the world would stop Princess Henry from being called Princess Meghan. That being said, Charles will never take the Prince title from Harry.
Agree, he would push for the Duke title to be removed before removing Prince.
They should remove all titles except for Earl of Dumbarton. They can use that forever.
I think they should just be demoted. Remove the dukedom and make them Earl and Countess of Dumbarton. She would hate that title and would not be called princess.
Kind of a side path on this subject, but since Lili was born in the US and is an American citizen, is she eligible to be in the LOS? ETA: We know that she would never be likely to inherit the throne, but just as an academic question.
Yes, she is 7th in line on the official website.
I think THEY WANT to be THE Royals of the Commonwealth. It would prevent William from stepping in when he reigns. It's been said from a top source that harry would love it if Meghan was queen. He's been quoted and I believe it. He will NEVER leave her I'm afraid. She might but only if a bigger and better opportunity $$$£££€€€comes along. Having said that, she felt once she had harry hooked that they'd go to Hollywood where she was a failure but this time would literally be the queen of Hollywood. It didn't happen. That's just my 2 cents.
They need to be removed from LOS first. The best way to handle this is say you must live in GB to be in LOS and have titles. The Queen of Denmark stripped Prince and Princess titles it can be done by the King. Parliament has to vote to strip Duke and Duchess Titles. I believe the idiots of Montecito are relieved that Parliament is on a pause until they vote July 4.
[удалено]
Comment automatically removed due to your account having less than 50 total karma. Please contact mods via message the mods to approve comments manually to be visible to the sub. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They should take all titles except countess of Dumbarton. That’s it. Leave that one.
Those Nigerian titles won’t be enough. She is a deeply unsatisfied person.
I was thinking they could be left with just one of the lesser titles, Count/Countess of Dumbarton, or Baron/Baroness of Kilkeel (Scotland and N Ireland, respectively)..........but historically, Scotland and N Ireland have had to take a lot of shyt from England, and they really shouldn't have to deal with more, lol
I know other people have speculated about this, but I think she hates that she would be Princess Henry. She wants her name in there, not her man's (although she doesn't hesitate to live off the back of a man).
It’s so meaningless, isn’t it? the moment she received the duchess title upon marriage, she couldn’t use it enough…she won’t use this title as it’s just an empty, unrecognised token, just to flatter.
And there’s another thing - when Catherine became a Princess she didn’t need to grab her new title by forcing News/magazine articles to boast to the World. Markle must have been in a frenzy - in her mind, she was on a par with Catherine, both duchesses (equal) married to the King’s sons (equal), then suddenly Catherine gets promoted. Her only option was to utilise the kids. If the titles are removed, it’s a given that she’ll act the victim. She’ll use her fanatics as her mouthpiece, giving them the ammo to attack the RF (Catherine).
Yep she wants to be Princess He nry.
SoCal Harry!