If you have been reading my monthly “Royal Report” then you know how frustrated I have become with Harry and Meghan’s drama, especially their legal drama. In the last year, they have filed four different lawsuits against the media and paparazzi, in an effort to show that they are victims of a clear agenda and that their privacy is being violated. One of the stated reasons that Harry and Meghan left the royal family was because they wanted more control over the media they worked with, and I’m assuming the coverage of them. These lawsuits, along with cutting off much of the UK media has actually only increased pressure on them from those publications. It can be confusing for the casual royal watcher, so I thought I would break down the biggest of the lawsuits and an overview of the four others, where they stand and what they reveal.

Lawsuit One

Who it’s against: Associated Newspapers (The Mail on Sunday)

What the complaint is: This lawsuit starts with a People Magazine cover story in XXX that involved five of Meghan’s friends speaking anonymously to defend her, particularly in the midst of the drama that followed her father around her wedding. In the article they refer to a letter that Meghan wrote her father. Her father then went to the tabloids with the letter and the Mail on Sunday published it. Meghan’s lawsuit, filed in the UK, claims that the Mail on Sunday violated her copyright on the letter as it’s writer, and published it illegally, also changing or leaving out parts of it. She is also filing for misuse of private information and a breach of the Data Protection Act.

Where it stands in the legal system: This has been slowed down by Covid, but there have been some remote pre-trial hearings. After the first hearing, which was to address parts of Meghan’s filings that the paper thought were irrelevant to the case, including the claim they had “acted dishonestly” by leaving out parts of the letter, she lost, and had to pay $87K in the paper’s legal fees. She then filed to have to names of her anonymous friends in the People article kept private, which she won for the time being, but the judge also said that may change if it’s necessary for the case. The judge also reprimanded Meghan’s team for leaking every legal filing to friendly press the second it was filed, and the Mail on Sunday for sharing legal details. The most recent hearing was WILD - she replaced her lawyer, and the Mail on Sunday asked to amend it’s defense to include the recent biography of Harry and Meghan, “Finding Freedom” as it included a huge range of deeply personal details that could have only come from the couple. The author of the book submitted a statement saying they hadn’t cooperated with the book, and then Meghan’s lawyer basically trashed the book and pointed out small details in it, claiming they were essentially made up. We haven’t yet heard if the MoS will be allowed to present this defense in court, but the trial date was set for January 11.

My hot take: I don’t think it’s possible that Meghan’s friends would go to People without her clear permission, and I think that she wanted the judge to rule that their identities wouldn’t be kept secret so that she could gracefully exit the lawsuit claiming to “protect” them. She wanted Associated Newspapers to back down and settle so she could win the moral victory, and they are clearly planning to move forward and drag her through the mud. If “Finding Freedom” is allowed to become part of the defense, Meghan is going to get even more publicly called out for everything she did behind the scenes and away from palace eyes to control her image. Given that the author is the person that the judge called out as the recipient of leaked court documents from her team, it seems likely that the Mail on Sunday will be able to show how close and collaborative that relationship was. Even if it doesn’t prove anything legally, what they accuse her of will stick.

Lawsuit Two

Who it’s against: The Sun (UK Newspaper)

What the complaint is: Prince Harry filed a lawsuit against The Sun newspaper the same day Meghan sued the Associated Newspapers over "illegal interception of voicemail messages.” This is widely believed to be related to phone hacking incidents in the 2000s, where the royal family did win a decisive victory.

Where it stands in the legal system: Big question mark here, it’s the lawsuit we have heard the least about.

My hot take: This and the Associated Newspapers suits were filed on the same day, when Harry and Meghan officially declared war on the UK media. It may not actually come to fruition, but did make that announcement more impactful as it added another title to the list.

Lawsuit Three

Who it’s against: Splash News (photo agency/papparazzi)

What the complaint is: Meghan is suing Splash News on the grounds that Archie’s privacy was violated, after one of its photographers took photos of her (the ones above) and Archie during a walk on Vancouver Island.  Meghan says that data protection laws were broken when the images were sold to British newspapers The Mail and The Sun.

Where it stands in the legal system: They have had an initial hearing in the UK and Splash news has pushed back. No trial date has been set.

My hot take: In these photos, Meghan seems to be on a public hiking trail, is looking directly at the camera and smiling, her security aren’t even reacting to the photographer and Archie’s face isn’t visible. I don’t think this is a clear win for them, and I think it may be revealed through the trial that she has worked with paparazzi on other occasions, which would be a terrible look.

Lawsuit Four

Who it’s against: ???

What the complaint is: The couple launched a lawsuit against an unidentfied paparazzo after they used a drone to take photos of Archie and Meghan’s mother Doria in the driveway of their home at the time (Tyler Perry’s mansion).

Where it stands in the legal system: They sued hoping to discover who the photographer was, as the source of the photos was pretty well concealed, and to warn the papers (Associated Newspapers, again) to stop publishing them. This is also the only lawsuit filed in the US, not the UK.

My hot take: I hope Meghan and Harry win this one - no one should be using a drone to invade private property and take photos of a minor.

Lawsuit Five

Who it’s against: The Sunday Times (one of the most reputable papers in the UK)

What the complaint is: While this isn’t necessarily a full on lawsuit yet, Harry filed a complaint with The Sunday Times over an article where a source claimed he had cancelled an upcoming fundraiser for the Invictus Games, because it was going to stream on Amazon and he had just signed a big deal with Netflix.

Where it stands in the legal system: We don’t know anything except that a complaint was filed and Harry/Invictus both issued statements disputing it. That said, The Sunday Times has not amended or removed the article, so they are standing by their reporting.

My hot take: This is different from other cases because it isn’t against a “tabloid” or paparazzi, but one of the most well-regarded papers in the country. I don’t think they will back down on this and it’s potentially the most damaging to Prince Harry specifically and his image as a humanitarian and philanthropist.