The British Royal Family, an institution often defined by its centuries-old traditions, is once again convulsed by a controversy that strikes at the very heart of modern royal identity: the question of titles. The unprecedented, decisive action taken by King Charles III to strip his brother, Prince Andrew, of his style, titles, and honours—leaving him as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor—has set a dramatic and arguably ruthless precedent.

This move has immediately thrown a fierce spotlight onto the statuses of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, raising the question that now dominates royal discourse: Should the Sussexes, non-working royals who have published memoirs and engaged in high-profile media partnerships, face a similar fate to the disgraced Duke of York?

The Andrew Precedent: A Chilling Warning
Former prince Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor stripped of remaining titles – ABC News

The controversy surrounding Prince Andrew stems from serious legal and ethical issues related to his association with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, allegations he has consistently denied. The removal of his titles, including “Prince” and “His Royal Highness (HRH),” was a clear act of brand protection by the Monarchy, signaling that extreme misconduct would be met with the most severe institutional censure.

Royal biographer Tom Bower suggested that the King’s “ruthless” act sent a “serious warning” to the Sussexes, claiming the move was an “unbelievable shock” to Prince Harry, who now must “really fear that William will strip him, Meghan and the children of their titles when he succeeds to the throne.”

The key difference between the two cases, however, underscores the complexity of the current debate:

Prince Andrew’s Removal: Was executed due to alleged criminal conduct and significant reputational damage stemming from that conduct.

The Sussexes’ Dilemma: Stems from their decision to step back from working royal duties, pursue financial independence, and then engage in highly critical public commentary (such as the Oprah Winfrey interview and the memoir Spare) about the Royal Family.

For many critics, the Sussexes’ actions constitute a betrayal of the institution, if not a legal or moral transgression akin to Andrew’s.

The Case for Removal: Commerce vs. Crown
The argument for stripping Harry and Meghan of their remaining titles—most notably Duke and Duchess of Sussex—rests primarily on two pillars: Betrayal and Commercial Exploitation.

1. The Argument of Betrayal and Trust: Critics, including several royal experts, argue that the revelations and accusations made by the couple, particularly in the 2021 Oprah interview and Harry’s 2023 memoir, caused irreparable damage to the reputation of the Royal Family. The allegations of institutional prejudice and detailing private family conflicts are seen as a fundamental breach of trust and a violation of the Monarchy’s unwritten rule: never complain, never explain, and never commercialize the family unit.

2. Commercial Exploitation of Titles: When the Sussexes stepped down as working royals in 2020, they agreed to stop using their HRH titles. However, they retained their Duke and Duchess titles, which critics claim they have relentlessly leveraged for commercial gain. For example, Meghan’s increasingly frequent and prominent use of “Duchess of Sussex” in public appearances and branding efforts has been cited as a strategic move of “pre-emptive branding.” Royal expert Tom Sykes noted that the frantic use of the title is an attempt to “imprint her family’s royal connections on the public before their inevitable removal.” The titles, in the eyes of their opponents, have become a “great trading asset” that undermines the non-commercial nature of the Crown.

The Case Against Removal: Harry’s Birthright and Legal Precedent
Andrew being stripped of his titles will leave Harry and Meghan fearing the same fate in

Conversely, the arguments against stripping the titles centre on family precedent, legal mechanics, and the potential for a “vindictive” backlash.

1. Constitutional and Legal Difficulty: Removing a peerage title (like Duke of Sussex) requires an Act of Parliament, which is a complex and politically fraught process, as demonstrated by the debates surrounding Andrew’s removal. While the Monarch can strip styles and honours through the Royal Prerogative (like the HRH), the Duke and Duchess titles are harder to eliminate. Stripping Harry of his Prince status, a title granted at birth, would also be a rare and drastic move, though the Andrew precedent showed that even the Prince title is not entirely untouchable.

2. The Optics of Vengeance: Many strategists caution that such a move by King Charles or, more likely, an ascending King William, could be seen as vindictive and petty. While Andrew’s title removal was justifiable on grounds of public safety and moral integrity, stripping Harry’s titles over media disagreements might create a public relations disaster, cementing the Sussexes’ narrative of being unfairly persecuted by “The Institution.”

3. Family and Birthright: Prince Harry is a birthright Prince and fifth in line to the throne. Unlike Andrew, who was exiled for his conduct, Harry willingly stepped away from duties. Removing his titles would fundamentally sever his connection to the institution, punishing him not for criminal misdeeds but for choosing a different path and speaking his truth—a move many feel is too harsh for the “spare.”

The Ultimate Arbiter: King William
Prince William Called a “King in All But Name” Amid Prince Andrew Decision

The consensus among royal commentators is that the decision on the Sussex titles will ultimately fall to Prince William when he ascends the throne. William is reportedly “furious” over the ongoing rift, particularly concerning the alleged “betrayals” detailed in the memoir Spare and the impact on his wife, Catherine.

It is widely speculated that William, intent on a “slimmed-down monarchy” focused solely on working members, may use the precedent set by his father with Andrew to remove the Sussexes’ titles, viewing them as an unnecessary distraction and a liability. The threat of removal is, therefore, a constant, powerful tool for internal control, keeping the Sussexes’ business ventures in check.

In this fierce controversy, the British Monarchy faces a critical choice: to demonstrate that its titles are sacred symbols of service and integrity, willing to be protected at all costs—even if that means permanently exiling a family member—or to allow the current arrangement to stand, preserving a tenuous peace at the cost of brand control.