Buckingham Palace appeared to make Prince Andrew's step back from royal life far easier thanPrince Harry andMeghan Markle 's, despite his reasons for resigning being considerably more controversial.- The Queen's son resigned in November following the backlash he faced over his BBC interview about his relationship with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
- Meanwhile, the most controversial thing the Sussexes were criticized for during their time as
royals was their use of private jets. - As part of their step back in January, Harry and Markle stopped actively using their HRH titles, and agreed to pay back the $3 million that taxpayers contributed to their home renovations.
- Andrew did not have to give up his title or pay back any public funds.
Buckingham Palace recently removed Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, and Prince Andrew's social media accounts from the royal website — a move which led royal commentators to believe both parties have been treated the same since resigning from royal duties.
The Duke of York officially stepped back from royal duties in November 2019. At the time of the announcement, it was rumored that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were also considering leaving royal life behind, although this wasn't confirmed until two months later.
"The fact that all social media accounts were dropped on the same day tells you all you need to know about
Still, there are many differences between the way the palace handled both situations — and comparing them reveals a big double standard.
Not only has Andrew not been required to give up any royal luxuries like Markle and Harry, but he was also given the opportunity to respond to media criticism in way that the Sussexes were not.
Harry and Markle were stripped of royal privileges that Andrew has been allowed to keep
Markle, Harry, and Andrew's decisions to step back stemmed from public scrutiny. For Andrew, this was a result of his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein.
Andrew officially resigned due to the backlash he faced over his BBC interview where he spoke about his relationship with the convicted sex offender, and denied accusiations that Epstein coerced a 17-year-old girl into having sex with the Duke on three different occassions.
"I continue to unequivocally regret my ill-judged association with Jeffrey Epstein," Andrew said in his official statement.
"His suicide has left many unanswered questions, particularly for his victims, and I deeply sympathise with everyone who has been affected and wants some form of closure."
Meanwhile, the most controversial thing the Sussexes were accused of was their use of private jets, and yet the sacrifices they made were considerably worse.
The couple may have retained their HRH titles, but they have stopped using them in an official capacity. They also announced plans to pay back the $3 million taxpayers spent towards their Frogmore Cottage home renovations.
"The Sussexes will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the
"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have shared their wish to repay Sovereign Grant expenditure for the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage, which will remain their UK family home," they added.
While the Sussexes' exit statement contained the logistics of their resignation, the same wasn't required for the duke.
Andrew wasn't asked to give up his HRH title, and he still appears to receive public funding.
According to a report in The Sun, the duke still employs $394,000-a-year bodyguards, whose wages are funded by British taxpayers. However, this has not been confirmed by Buckingham Palace.
Harry's departure also meant he won't be able to use his military titles, something which wasn't his decision, according to Marie Claire. The duke said he was "devastated" about stepping down as Captain General during an appearance at the Mountbatten Festival of Music earlier this year, the publication reports.
Meanwhile, the Duke of York turned down a military promotion after his resignation. Buckingham Palace announced that the promotion will be "deferred until such time that His Royal Highness returns to public duty" at Andrew's request.
Buckingham Palace protected Andrew, but not Markle
Many public figures have highlighted the unfair treatment Markle has received at the hands of the media, with many arguing that she has received worse criticism than Andrew simply for voicing her opinion on political matters.
"There are a lot of people in the media who seem to have more problem with Meghan Markle being a person with an opinion than with Prince Andrew being an accused sex offender," author Matt Haig wrote on Twitter.
"Riddle me this: when public figures in media and politics call for Meghan Markle to be stripped of her title for speaking out against one of the worst Presidents in US history and a menace to the world. But remain silent on the abhorrent Prince Andrew. What does that make them?" Dr. Jennifer Cassidy wrote.
—Dr. Jennifer Cassidy (@OxfordDiplomat) August 22, 2020
Markle recently admitted she felt "unprotected" by her Kensington Palace press team, who she said wouldn't allow her to respond to the "large number of false and damaging articles by the UK tabloid media" in the lead up to her exit.
This was due to the palace's strict "no comment" policy, the duchess explained.
Andrew appeared to be exempt from this policy. His tell-all BBC interview about his friendship with Epstein was held at Buckingham Palace — an indication that he had been given special permission to defend himself on the world's stage.
Just days later, Andrew announced his resignation. The palace was quick to stifle reports that the duke had been forced to quit by the Queen, with a palace spokesperson telling Insider "it was a personal decision."
This same level of support wasn't given to the duchess. For example, Buckingham Palace did not deny the rumors that Markle and Harry didn't consult the Queen before resigning, even though Markle later said this was untrue.
Buckingham Palace declined to comment when contacted by Insider.
Read more:
8 royal luxuries Meghan Markle and Prince Harry no longer have access to