Posted on 09/07/2026 9:22:03 AM PDT by jerod
The letter reiterated that Harry and Meghan stepped down from their representative duties on behalf of the Sovereign in January 2020 and have not returned to the working Royal Family since
King Charles has made clear that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, will retain their status as private citizens and non-working members of the Royal Family, even as they spend an extended period in Britain.
The clarification was set out in a letter from the Lord Chamberlain, issued on the King's behalf and circulated among senior government officials, military authorities and Lord Lieutenants, according to reports.
The letter reiterated that Harry and Meghan stepped down from their representative duties on behalf of the Sovereign in January 2020 and have not returned to the working Royal Family since. "It follows that there is no change to the current status of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex," the guidance said.
It also stated that their His and Her Royal Highness styles remain “in abeyance” and are not to be used. Their charitable activities are considered personal initiatives and are undertaken in a private capacity.
The guidance effectively places Harry and Meghan in a position comparable to private citizens who retain royal rank while pursuing commercial and charitable interests independently.
The Palace has also indicated that security-related matters concerning the couple should be addressed by individual police forces rather than being treated as part of their royal duties.
The clarification comes amid renewed public interest following Harry and Meghan's return to Britain, raising questions over whether their 2020 arrangement, agreed with the late Queen Elizabeth II, remained applicable.
Buckingham Palace's position is that the arrangement continues. The couple will not resume official duties, receive public funding for royal work or have their commercial and charitable activities managed by the Palace.
Their UK return, therefore, does not represent a restoration of their working-royal status.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
It’s a fair deal for the gold digger and the fish.
Good Lord, these inbred twits carrying on this ‘’medieval make believe’’ of kings and princes.
This is the 21st. century for God's sake, not the 10th.
The British should have done away with this antiquated relic from antiquity and adopted a real, representative form of government.
I guess they haven’t wanted to...
The monarchy means something to most of them, and they don’t much care about parvenu Americans who think they’re ‘twits’.
There's still time for them to move to Australia.
Which does what, limit his wife’s options should she wish to divorce? The kids would be US citizens anyway, they technically could be drafted.
Charlie could make the Spare Governor General.
One was born in the U.S., the other was not (if the stories we’ve been told about the births are even true.) I’m not sure how the formal citizenship would be decided by the parents in a case like that, but since they are both in the line of succession (6th and 7th), I would imagine they’re considered British citizens.
But, yes, the opinion of one person I heard commenting on this was that the U.K. laws would give more consideration to the father in a divorce than the American ones would.
Of course, there was probably more than one reason for the move. These two have a host of problems.
I forgot about dual citizenship. Parents can’t renounce that on behalf of minors; but the child can renounce it himself, even before the age of 18 in some cases.
What ever he made in the last 6 years is totally his and exempt from tax.
Uganda withdraws from Prince Harry’s Invictus Games amid worsening Royal family tension
The Times of London also has this story, but theirs is behind a paywall.
That’s another shoe that’s about to drop... There’s a lot of funny business going on with these Invictus Games. People have quit the organization and there are lots and lots of nasty rumors... Harry and Megs have been treating their charities like piggybanks and doing that sort of nonsense can lead to criminal charges. Better to be in England rather than the USA where they tend to pursue corruption and fraud with regards to charities. Unlike the UK and Canada where corruption tends to be ignored by authorities.
That’s another shoe that’s about to drop... There’s a lot of funny business going on with these Invictus Games. People have quit the organization and there are lots and lots of nasty rumors... Harry and Megs have been treating their charities like piggybanks and doing that sort of nonsense can lead to criminal charges. Better to be in England rather than the USA where they tend to pursue corruption and fraud with regards to charities. Unlike the UK and Canada where corruption tends to be ignored by authorities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.