Explanation: Why a Judge Denied Harry's Second Judicial Review

Prince Harry's lawyers fought, and just lost, a lawsuit against the British Government over whether he can pay for for Met Security

This is what I get for going on vacation and promising myself I’d unplug from all news and social media!

I won’t bore you, my dear readers, by recounting the near-catastrophic, high-speed car chase that turned out to be less than true. My friends over at Berkshire to Buckingham and The Royal Rundown have done some great work unpacking these events. So please, head over there for the details and give them a like and follow if you want to support their work.

Today, I’ll be focusing on the Judicial Review news released yesterday, which I received many messages about to cover:

I want to give this topic it’s fair shake. To do that, we’re going back to January 2022, where in an effort to head off a story breaking in the Daily Mail about Prince Harry suing the government, the Prince released the below statement to their unofficial biographer Omid Scobie:

The statement went on to say:

“Prince Harry inherited a security risk at birth, for life. He remains sixth in line to the throne, served two tours of combat duty in Afghanistan, and in recent years his family has been subjected to well-documented neo-Nazi and extremist threats. The UK will always be Prince Harry's home and a country he wants his wife and children to be safe in. With the lack of police protection, comes too great a personal risk.”

Unbeknownst to the public, the Prince had been waging a war with the U.K. Government on its decision to deny him tax-payer funded security. The crux of the argument was he felt “unsafe” to return to the U.K. with his family without 24/7 RPO Security.

As the story evolved, news came to light that provided more variations in recollections: