Prince Harry: Quit the Job, Still Wants the Perks
Prince Harry, 2020. Photo courtesy of Minerva97 under CC BY 2.0.
He gave up the titles, the tiaras, the palace duties — but now Prince Harry wants the perks, too. Specifically, he wants British taxpayers to foot the bill for his personal security. And while critics are crying hypocrisy, Harry's camp says this is about survival — not ceremony.
At the center of this latest royal storm is a courtroom fight over police protection. Prince Harry, once known for walking behind his mother's casket and later for fleeing the UK with Meghan Markle, is now battling the British government to reinstate his taxpayer-funded bodyguards — the kind of protection typically reserved for royals who still punch the clock.
A Royal Without the Role — And Now, Without the Security
When Harry and Meghan stepped back from their roles as full-time working royals in 2020, they didn't just move to California — they lost access to full-time state-funded security in the UK. Instead, the Royal and VIP Executive Committee, or Ravec, downgraded Harry's status and began assessing his security on a case-by-case basis — similar to foreign dignitaries or celebrities visiting the country.
That didn't sit well with the Duke of Sussex, who says the change in protection was both unfair and dangerously out of step with the real threats his family faces.
Prince Harry said he was, "singled out for inferior treatment" and "forced to step back," as reported by The Mirror. The bespoke security arrangement offered by Ravec reportedly doesn't measure up to what he needs — or what he was previously promised.
Why Prince Harry Says He's Still a Target
In written submissions to the court, Harry's attorneys argued that his royal status, military service, and high-profile media presence make him a lifetime target. They highlighted credible threats, including a 2020 call from Al-Qaeda for Harry to be murdered and a "dangerous car pursuit with paparazzi" in 2023 in New York, as reported by the BBC.
His lawyers also pointed out that he remains fifth in line to the throne — not exactly a distant figure in royal succession. They claim his case isn't about demanding the same treatment he had as a working royal but rather being considered under the same process used for other high-risk public figures. "Prince Harry inherited a security risk at birth, for life," said an unnamed legal representative in a previous statement, as reported by NBC News.
The Home Office Says: He Made His Choice
Lawyers for the UK Home Office, which oversees Ravec, pushed back hard. They argue the decision to downgrade Harry's security was appropriate, lawful, and based on his change of status — namely, that he is no longer a working royal and now resides in the United States.
According to their legal filings, Ravec used expert judgment to develop a "different and so-called bespoke process" that could still provide security where appropriate — but without giving Harry the same blanket protection he had before, the BBC reports. The Home Office's legal team claims that Harry's arguments cherry-pick the facts and ignore the full picture.
He Offered to Pay — They Still Said No
In a separate but related dispute, Harry reportedly offered to personally pay for his own security when visiting the UK. That, too, was rejected. The UK government maintained that its police forces are not for hire, even by royalty, and that public policing should not be made available to private citizens on demand — regardless of their lineage.
Harry's lawyers said this rejection compounded the unfairness. If he can't receive public protection through his royal ties, and can't even pay for it privately, what's left?
What Happens Next?
This week's Court of Appeal hearing, overseen by three judges — Lord Justice Bean, Lord Justice Edis, and Sir Geoffrey Vos — wrapped up Wednesday. While most of the hearing was held in open court, sensitive security matters were discussed behind closed doors. A final ruling is expected to be issued at a later date.
In the meantime, Prince Harry continues to face intense scrutiny both at home and abroad. He flew to the UK ahead of the hearing but reportedly didn't meet with King Charles, who left for Italy shortly after Harry's arrival.
Is This a Fight for Privilege — or Protection?
To the tabloids, this looks like classic royal contradiction: a man who rejected his family's role but now demands the family's perks. But from Harry's side, it's not about royal benefits — it's about making sure his children can visit their father's homeland without fear. "The UK is central to the heritage of my children," Harry said, as reported by the BBC, adding that he wants them to feel safe and at home there.
That's what makes this case so sticky — and so watchable. Because this isn't just another royal tantrum or PR move. It's a legal question with real-world consequences for one of the world's most famous families.
And it's still anyone's guess how the judges will answer it.
References: Prince Harry in court battle over security protection despite stepping down as a full-time royal | Prince Harry's downgraded security was unjustified, court hears | Prince Harry says he was 'forced to step back' and 'singled out' in new claim
