In a shocking turn of events, the marriage between Meghan and Harry seems to be on the brink of collapse, with divorce looming on the horizon.
It appears that if Harry can gather his thoughts and realize that he would be better off without Meghan, their separation is likely to become inevitable.
Adding fuel to the fire, Charles III, the future king, seems to be baiting them into bringing their children to the UK, only to disappoint them by denying their presence at important family events.
The situation takes an even more peculiar twist as we delve into the intricacies of British royal tradition.
In the UK, the sovereign assumes the role of custodial guardian for any grandchildren.
This means that Meghan and Harry’s children, including Archie, may find themselves excluded from family gatherings due to this archaic rule.
It is not beyond imagination that they might be encouraged to stay in the UK for an extended period after Charles III’s coronation, giving Harry an opportunity to serve Meghan with divorce papers during their stay.
The question arises as to which court would handle the divorce proceedings.
Would it be the British court, where they were married, or the California court, where they currently reside?
One would assume that a prenuptial agreement would have been in place for royalty, but perhaps the Winsors manage their generational wealth differently.
If the divorce were to proceed under UK law, it would give King Charles the upper hand in securing custody of the children, leaving Meghan in a precarious negotiating position.
This brings us to a larger debate surrounding the custody rights of minor grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
Does the King truly possess legal custody over them, supplanting the authority of their parents?
A 300-year-old rule raises these questions, leaving us pondering whether Queen Elizabeth indeed holds legal custody of her minor great-grandchildren.
As the divorce unfolds, it becomes crucial for the King to strip Meghan of her titles and withhold his assent, as she has proven to be perpetually dissatisfied and untrustworthy in honoring agreements.
There are concerns that Meghan may manipulate the situation, playing games with the children’s emotions until they reach adulthood.
By then, they may become so alienated that custody battles become inconsequential.
This all stems from a historical dispute between King George and his son, which resulted in the King being granted authority over his grandchildren.
The court ruled in favor of the King, asserting that his right to supervise extended to his grandchildren, even during the father’s lifetime.
The case raises fundamental questions about the King’s prerogative in matters of grandchild custody.
Does His Majesty possess the right to oversee the education, care, place of abode, appointment of guardians, and even approval of marriages?
This ruling dates back to a time when fathers and mothers did not share equal power over their children.
The royal prerogative exists in legal vacuums, where statutes or other legal provisions are absent.
While the Royal Marriages Act of 1772 curtailed some of these powers, the succession to the Crown Act of 2013 resurrected aspects of the royal prerogative.
This intricate situation also has implications for any future children born to Meghan and Harry.
They too would find themselves subject to the King’s custodial authority.
However, it is worth noting that the Palace has not made a significant fuss about this law until now.
In 2018, Charles III expressed his respect for his son’s parenting choices, suggesting that he would not overshadow important decisions.
It seems that the King understands and respects Meghan and Harry’s desire to raise their children privately, perhaps only requesting more photographs as a lighthearted joke.