Prince Charles to alter the Letters Patent - Sussex Children won't become Prince/Princess

[Comeinoutoftherain]

Apologies for the Daily Mail reference, but it's all I have so far.

Apparently PC told H&M shortly before the Oprah interview that his intention was to amend the Letters Patent so that only the children in direct line to the throne (aka William's children) would receive the Prince/Princess title.

So neither Archie nor Lilibet were going to be "upgraded" to Prince/Princess on the Queen's death.

That explains that slightly vague comments made in the OW interview about Archie not being made a Prince; and why relations between PC and H&M were clearly very fraught.

If this is true (and I accept it's hard to see the wood for the trees with the constant press briefings from both sides) I can see it from both points of view.

Harry is in Prince Andrew's position (as a royal, not as a person) which makes Archie and Lilibet on a par with Beatrice and Eugenie. As they get older, and William's children start their own families, the Sussex children drop down the pecking order pretty quickly.

I think Charles has it right that the British Public don't want to keep paying for an extended royal family, you can see that playing out in Europe at the moment. So even if H&M were working royals, their children likely won't be; and I can understand why he wants to present a limited number of royals to the public.

From Harry's perspective, it must feel like a downgrade. It must be difficult being the second (and only other) child in a hierarchical monarchy; being aware from the beginning of all that William is to inherit. Having his children lose something that is currently their birthright must sting a bit.

This should probably have been considered before William and Harry had kids. I doubt it would have been as big a deal when you are not considering actual children, just abstract ones. Or at the very least, it should have been done when the Letters Patent were altered for George, Charlotte and Louis.

It's clearly added to an already tense atmosphere and won't help family relations get back on track.

@Mummy194

If people are so curious about US vs UK in terms on titled British royals, maybe they could have nitpicked Prince Michael's grandchildren who were born in the US. A similar procedure probably took place.

Freddie Windsor’s title is far less complicated than Harry’s so it’s not a like for like comparison, but would be interesting to see where, and if, Lord and Lady featured.

Given the cock ups on Archie’s birth certificate (how, just how, does no-one spot the omission of Prince in Harry’s name when all his names were listed?) it’s really no surprise people are interested in Lili’s

Especially given the comparison between UK and US certificates as well.

Was answering a poster saying they wondered if there was a drop down button regarding titles etc. I am saying he is titled too.

You really need to drop this strange “nitpicking babies”, “nitpicked grandchildren” phraseology about posters looking at birth registration formats, though. It’s making you sound a bit strange.

Can you drop the personal, patronising, personal attacks on people who are not antiH&M. Calligraphies them strange and trying to make out they are confused. It's a tired strategy.

@Mummy194

You really need to drop this strange “nitpicking babies”, “nitpicked grandchildren” phraseology about posters looking at birth registration formats, though. It’s making you sound a bit strange.

Can you drop the personal, patronising, personal attacks on people who are not antiH&M. Calligraphies them strange and trying to make out they are confused. It's a tired strategy.

If you think I’m making a personal attack, report it.

I said something yesterday to someone who was being obsequious about Kate that they apparently weren’t thrilled about either, but I didn’t mean it badly and I think it’s standing.

It’s just that both fan clubs can veer off into irrationality occasionally. That tends to happen when you’re pursuing an agenda or an idol instead of facts.

@JustLyra

Given the cock ups on Archie’s birth certificate (how, just how, does no-one spot the omission of Prince in Harry’s name when all his names were listed?) it’s really no surprise people are interested in Lili’s

Especially given the comparison between UK and US certificates as well.

No surprise, either, if the US authorities are less schooled or less worried about the niceties of British Royal titles.

@RickiTarr

In that case, maybe you can also make the same accusations to the other side?

[quote Mummy194]@RickiTarr

In that case, maybe you can also make the same accusations to the other side?[/quote]
I just told you. I made a criticism of a post by someone “on the other side” as recently as yesterday.

Another reason why this birth certificate is of more than usual interest: it shows that Lilibet is teh first person who is both eligible to be a US President and is also high in the line of succession to the UK throne.

The goalpost shifting on the thread in order to continue to have something to be offended about is amusing.

Publishing a birth certificate is the lowest of the low - actually, it’s perfectly normal for these documents of public record to be published

well, using a birth certificate to criticise the parents would only happen to Meghan - no, it happened to Kate also.

well, was there a thread on Mumsnet then? followed closely by what about other minor Royals then?

Do the people who are so bothered by the publication of birth certificates, and discussions about what they may directly or indirectly reveal also respond so strongly to things like Who Do You think You Are where they form the primary records of so many aspects of family histories? Birth certificates are not private documents, they are public. Anyone can get a copy of one.

I would have guessed that Meghan would have rather used Duchess of Sussex too.

I've read several articles that suggest that she chose not to use her title on the certificate. Many states (mine included, don't know about California) only allow the birth name of the mother. If that is what it says on the form, she can't put Duchess.

Another reason why this birth certificate is of more than usual interest: it shows that Lilibet is teh first person who is both eligible to be a US President and is also high in the line of succession to the UK throne.

Archie is eligible to be president (well, he will be when he turns 35). He has US citizenship from birth through his mother. The requirement of being a "natural born" citizen essentially means that you are a citizen from birth and don't have to go through a naturalization process for citizenship.

Can you imagine King George having a summit with President Mountbatten-Windsor? That’s a bit of a brain twister.

@SenecaFallsRedux If that is correct (I’m not saying you aren’t, just slightly confused) why did all those people claim that Obama wasn’t an American citizen because they thought he was born in Kenya for whatever reason?

[quote Cacacoisfarraige]@SenecaFallsRedux

I don’t think that is correct, otherwise Trump wouldn’t have been saying Obama wasn’t entitled to be president.

I am pretty sure you must be born in the US[/quote]
I’m not sure we can take Trump’s rantings as evidence of anything either way.

There was also controversy about John McCain because he was born in Panama - some parts of it around the canal were considered US territory, and so various anti-McCain factions were arguing he had to prove exactly where in Panama he was born. Ultimately, he didn’t become the President so the point was moot.

"The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term 'natural born' citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship 'by birth' or 'at birth,' either by being born 'in' the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; The predominant legal scholarship holds that the term natural born citizen applies, quite simply, to anyone who is a U.S. citizen at birth, or by birth, and does not have to go through the naturalization process. The child of parents who are U.S. citizens, regardless of whether he or she is born abroad, fits into the category under most modern interpretations."
From this site

Ted Cruz was born in Canada, but that didn't matter to his (Republican) supporters when he ran for the Presidential nomination...

Of course, Trump also claimed Obama was a Muslim.

I’m happy to amend my post to say her birth certificate is of interest because she’s the first person who is unchallengeably both eligible to be President and high up in the UK line of succession

President Obama's situation as alleged by Trump is different. There are requirements about how long the US citizen parent has lived in the US for them to be able to convey natural born citizenship to a child born outside the US. These are by statute, which can be changed. Trump's claim was that if President Obama were born in Kenya, his mother did not meet those requirements at the time of his birth.

There is no question that Meghan meets those requirements.

It’s not a black and white issue as it’s not clearly defined.

It is actually clearly defined in Archie's case and in Vice-President Harris's. It's just that some people with an agenda try to twist the meaning of words in the Constitution and in statutes to their own purposes.