Has Prince Harry and Meghan's status affected their children's royal claims?
Executive summary
Prince Harry and Meghan’s decision to step back from “working” royal duties in 2020 removed automatic, publicly funded security for the family and limited the couple’s official royal roles — but their two children retain the princely titles granted under rules after King Charles became sovereign, and those titles have been used publicly since Lilibet’s 2023 christening [1] [2]. Security and practical arrangements have been the main barriers to the children visiting the U.K.; a fresh government review of Harry’s UK security arrangements has opened the door to possible visits and reunions with King Charles [3] [4].
1. Titles remain in place, but their use has been intermittent
Archie and Lilibet were given the styles prince and princess under the rules that apply to descendants of the sovereign, and reporting notes they were permitted to use those titles when Charles became king — though the family initially did not use them until Lilibet’s christening in 2023 [1] [2]. Coverage from outlets including Harper’s Bazaar and ABC News states the children “carry the royal titles” and that the family chose when and how publicly to use them [1] [2]. Some stories and commentators have floated hypothetical changes to titles, but available reporting documents the children’s current styling rather than any finalized removal [5] [1].
2. Stepping back from duties changed practical protections, not legal succession
When Harry and Meghan stepped away from frontline royal roles in 2020 they surrendered patronages and official duties; that move also led to the end of automatic taxpayer-funded police protection for the Duke and his family on a continuing basis [6]. Multiple outlets cite that the removal of full security cover followed their change in status and that Harry later lost a legal appeal to restore automatic protection [4] [3]. Those security changes affect whether the family can safely travel to and appear in the U.K. — a practical constraint on the children’s ability to take part in royal life — but the sources do not say that the children’s place in the line of succession or their legal titles were revoked by that administrative change [4] [3] [1].
3. Security reviews, not title-stripping, drive recent headlines
Recent reporting focuses on Harry’s campaign to obtain a fresh risk assessment and the Royal and VIP Executive Committee (RAVEC) review that could alter protection arrangements for visits to the U.K. The Guardian and People describe a renewed threat assessment request and an RMB reassessment — steps that could make it possible for Meghan and the children to visit Charles in Britain if security provision is approved [3] [4]. Headlines suggesting the kids “may reunite” with the king are tied explicitly to those security developments rather than to any formal change to royal status [7] [4] [3].
4. Claims of “blocked” passports and administrative frictions
Reporting has documented suspected administrative delays around the children’s passports; The Guardian and outlets relayed that the Sussexes believed use of HRH styling on applications contributed to delays and threatened legal action to obtain information [8]. That episode demonstrates friction at the interface of protocol, paperwork and politics; it does not, in the cited coverage, show a formal legal determination that changed the children’s names or claims [8].
5. Political and personal context shapes interpretations
Media narratives vary along partisan and commercial lines. Some outlets emphasize family estrangement and the optics of alleged attempts to “distance” the monarchy from the Sussexes, framing any future administrative changes as politically charged and potentially racially tinged [5]. Other coverage stresses practical safety concerns and bureaucratic processes — RAVEC, the Home Office, and police threat assessments — as the proximate causes of travel constraints [3] [4]. Readers should expect competing frames: one that sees institutional control and one that sees routine security and protocol at work [5] [3].
6. What the sources do not say
Available sources do not report that Archie or Lilibet have legally lost their place in the line of succession or that the sovereign has issued a formal decree removing their princely styles; coverage instead records that they “carry” or have used the titles and that the family decided when to deploy them publicly [1] [2]. The sources also do not confirm any definitive plan to alter the children’s titles; stories about possible future restructuring are speculative or interpretive rather than documentation of a completed policy change [5] [1].
7. Bottom line for readers
As of the cited reporting, the primary consequence of Harry and Meghan’s changed royal roles has been functional: fewer automatic protections and reduced official duties that complicate travel and public participation for their family. The children’s princely styling remains on the public record and in use, but practical access to the U.K. and to royal engagements depends on security reviews and political decisions rather than only on legal title questions [4] [1] [3].