At the same time that they do not want to be burdened with royal duties they are demanding they retain their royal titles—all the better to make money with?
If this seems hypocritical, it’s a point that’s been made by legions of royal experts. Still, the point seems to be lost on the two who like to be called the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
Under the current law, royals can only be stripped of their titles if an Act of Parliament is introduced and a royal assent from the Queen is made. The only time royals have been stripped of their titles in the past occurred because they, “took arms” against the nation.
Marlene Koenig is the latest royal watcher to chime in on this debate. She told Express UK, “I think it’s the Peerage Reform Act from a couple of years ago, says a peerage can be removed if a peer commits a felony and is in jail for more than a year.”
“Does that apply to Harry? No. So it’s going to be very difficult. Would Parliament take up this Act and have the Queen give her assent to remove the Sussex peerage from Harry?”
She went on to say, “Go back to 1917, with the Title Deprivation Act which removed the peerages from two members of the British Royal Family who were German and were enemies.”
“That’s why they removed them and in 1919 the Royal Assent came that the Duke of Albany, the Duke of Cumberland and his son and an Austrian viscount were stripped of their peerages. And the Duke of Cumberland’s son could not inherit the peerage because he took arms against the United Kingdom.”
She then went on to ask the rhetorical question, “Has Harry taken up arms against the United Kingdom?”
Harry has done a lot of things against his family and the UK, such as mouth off, be a whiney brat, and overstepped his royal bounds. As far as we know he has not taken up arms.