General News about the Sussex Family, Part Two: April-August 2020

[muriel]

Why question something we can’t possibly know the answer to considering the controversy bringing the media into the discussion creates?

This is not about the media, but the messaging emanating from H&M.

Considering what flack they got for publicly annoucing they had spoken to the Queen it's probably a very good thing they haven't put out a press release or anything for Father's Day and kept their celebrations private.

I think they did the right thing by now releasing anything in relation to Fathers Day, just as I believe it was completely unnecessary for them to let it be known to the media and the world at large that they had spoken to HM on her birthday.

 

[Fijiro]

They released that video for charity on US Mother's Day didn't they? That was nice.

Considering what flack they got for publicly annoucing they had spoken to the Queen it's probably a very good thing they haven't put out a press release or anything for Father's Day and kept their celebrations private.

The video was for "Save the Children with Stories" was for Archie's birthday, not mothers day.

 

[QueenMathilde]

Isn't father's and mother's day a different day in the UK than it is in the US? I thought mother's day was at any rate.

 

[Heavs]

Mother's Day in the UK is Mothering Sunday on the 4th Sunday of Lent. This year it was 22nd March. Father's Day is the same as the US and other countries and is not related to anything historical/religious.

I got mixed up between Archie's birthday and US Mother's Day as to when they released the video.

 

[Betsypaige]

Posted it where?
And if Harry had done so (or posted a photo of Archie, as after all, he is a father too) no doubt he would have been criticised by some for being publicity hungry, for publicising Archie after he and Meghan said they wanted him to be brought up as a private citizen, imposing himself on BRF celebrations for his brother's birthday, etc etc.

I've got no doubt at all that Harry phoned or zoomed his father with best wishes and wished his brother a Happy Birthday but did it privately.

Good points...I do think you’re right...he probably would get ripped.

I was too mild with my first comment as I absolutely believe that Harry spoke with/Zoomed/whatever with his father....

 

[Eskimo]

They released that video for charity on US Mother's Day didn't they? That was nice.

Considering what flack they got for publicly annoucing they had spoken to the Queen it's probably a very good thing they haven't put out a press release or anything for Father's Day and kept their celebrations private.

I guess they could not do something similar for Father's Day?

 

[poppy7]

I guess they could not do something similar for Father's Day?

Archie's birthday. Best they do nothing. They have no platform and no reason.

 

[MARG]

Wow, that is cold and highly questionable.

 

[evolvingdoors]

They actually kind of indirectly did release something on the 21st.
The letter (which is dated a few days prior) to the charity was posted on the 21st.
Could be just a coincidence.
Just like with the manifesto being posted a day before Catherine birthday.
Or the Smart works video posted on W&C anniversary.
Or any of the many other posts and videos that interestingly always get posted on important events and days, with a strong emphasis of W&C.

But i’m sure it is just a coincidence.

 

[Pranter]

They actually kind of indirectly did release something on the 21st.
The letter (which is dated a few days prior) to the charity was posted on the 21st.
Could be just a coincidence.
Just like with the manifesto being posted a day before Catherine birthday.
Or the Smart works video posted on W&C anniversary.
Or any of the many other posts and videos that interestingly always get posted on important events and days, with a strong emphasis of W&C.

But i’m sure it is just a coincidence.

Yes lots of coincidences in the BRF with how things get posted over the years. But for some reason no one seemed to have a problem with it or think it was some sort of deliberate attempt until now.


LaRae

 

[Claire]

Hello,
Just wanted to ask - if the Sussex's have subsequently children can they be born in the USA ? Is there any law that says they must be born in the UK?

 

[QueenMathilde]

Hello,
Just wanted to ask - if the Sussex's have subsequently children can they be born in the USA ? Is there any law that says they must be born in the UK?

I don't know about UK citizenship laws but just as members of the royal family they quit the royal family. So I don't see any reason why they'd have to have their children there. I don't think future children will even have titles much like "Master" Archie.

 

[Claricecolin]

I don't know about UK citizenship laws but just as members of the royal family they quit the royal family. So I don't see any reason why they'd have to have their children there. I don't think future children will even have titles much like "Master" Archie.

"Master" is the same as "Mr." .

 

[Curryong]

Yes, its a British form of address for a child, not a title. Plus the Sussexes didn't 'quit the Royal Family'. They are still members of the family, just not working royals.

 

[Somebody]

Any children would still be in line to the throne; but given that the line includes foreign sovereigns who were born and raised abroad (and don't possess British citizenship I assume) I don't see any legal issue with someone in line to the throne being born abroad.

 

[Eskimo]

Hello,
Just wanted to ask - if the Sussex's have subsequently children can they be born in the USA ? Is there any law that says they must be born in the UK?

They can be born anywhere in the world and still be in the line of succession. Like others said, they would probably be called Master/Miss just like Archie.

 

[Jacknch]

Indeed, any future children are likely to have same style/title/form of address as Archie and being born outside of the UK won't make a difference to such child's line in the succession.

We can discuss the topic further in the https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/questions-about-british-styles-and-titles-258.html thread.

 

[QueenMathilde]

"Master" is the same as "Mr." .

I know. That's what I said. He didn't have a title.

Any children would still be in line to the throne; but given that the line includes foreign sovereigns who were born and raised abroad (and don't possess British citizenship I assume) I don't see any legal issue with someone in line to the throne being born abroad.

It wouldn't matter in the UK - but I'm not sure how it would matter in the US. I don't think US citizens can have titles. I could be wrong but it seems like I've read that before.

 

[Countessmeout]

It wouldn't matter in the UK - but I'm not sure how it would matter in the US. I don't think US citizens can have titles. I could be wrong but it seems like I've read that before.

People confuse this. This is the actual law.

No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.

Archie could not be made a duke by the government of the USA. And if he was holding office in the government, he couldn't accept a title from a foreign state. This at no way means that they can not hold a title from a foreign state.

It would simply be a courtesy in the US, little more then a surname.

 

[Eskimo]

People confuse this. This is the actual law.



Archie could not be made a duke by the government of the USA. And if he was holding office in the government, he couldn't accept a title from a foreign state. This at no way means that they can not hold a title from a foreign state.

It would simply be a courtesy in the US, little more then a surname.

Archie is a completely different story. He is heir to a Royal Dukedom. I do not know if there is a legal way he can denounce that, outside of the Monarch stripping him (or Harry) of the title.

 

[Hallo girl]

He is only a baby, his life will be planned out enough without us planning a political career for him.

 

[QueenMathilde]

People confuse this. This is the actual law.



Archie could not be made a duke by the government of the USA. And if he was holding office in the government, he couldn't accept a title from a foreign state. This at no way means that they can not hold a title from a foreign state.

It would simply be a courtesy in the US, little more then a surname.

I don't think they'd give another child a title seeing as they didn't give Archie one. It's one of the reasons I think they were thinking of leaving the royal family long before they did.

 

[Eskimo]

I don't think they'd give another child a title seeing as they didn't give Archie one. It's one of the reasons I think they were thinking of leaving the royal family long before they did.

Archie has a title. He is legally Earl of Dumbarton, he's just not using it. The same as Prince Edward's children: they are legally Prince and Princess with the style of HRH but they are not using them

 

[Lumutqueen]

Some update on Henry and Meghan;

https://twitter.com/x/status/1275821100929253376

“Source confirms Harry and Meghan have signed with @hwaspeakers for discussions and speeches with trade associations, corporations and community forums. Topics include racial justice, gender equity, mental health, the environment. There are no plans to speak about the royal family”

 

[Eskimo]

Some update on Henry and Meghan;

https://twitter.com/x/status/1275821100929253376

“Source confirms Harry and Meghan have signed with @hwaspeakers for discussions and speeches with trade associations, corporations and community forums. Topics include racial justice, gender equity, mental health, the environment. There are no plans to speak about the royal family”

With everything going on regarding race in the US, saying that you are willing to speak about it if someone pays you is not a good look.

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

What's the market for people with their level of training and expertise on these topics, aside from "speaking about the Royal Family?"

In fact, we know the answer for this as it pertains to Meghan (e.g., someone with her level of training, experience, expertise, but without the benefit of a connection to the Royal Family) because she was a public figure actively seeking out similar speaking engagements before she had this connection. The answer is: very, very small.

 

[Denville]

Archie has a title. He is legally Earl of Dumbarton, he's just not using it. The same as Prince Edward's children: they are legally Prince and Princess with the style of HRH but they are not using them

He's not actaully Earl of Dumbarton. That is one of Harry's titles, and usually the eldest son would use the secondary title.... but woudl not be a peer. He will however inherit the title Duke of Sussex in due course.

Archie is a completely different story. He is heir to a Royal Dukedom. I do not know if there is a legal way he can denounce that, outside of the Monarch stripping him (or Harry) of the title.

Neither Harry nor the queen can take away his title when he inherits. (To inherit H will have to be dead).... But Archie can renounce the dukedom if he wishes to, within a year of inheriting...

 

[ACO]

Harry and Meghan were volunteering yesterday in LA.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1275840295372914690

 

[Lumutqueen]

Omid Scobie confirms the signing;

https://twitter.com/x/status/1275849151180427265

 

[Denville]

I suppose it is not that surprising