The marriage between Meghan and Harry is an international one, recognized legally both in the UK and the US. As a result, they have the option to file for divorce based on where they were married, where they currently reside, or according to their citizenship.
Meghan is American, while Harry is British. If Harry decides to file for divorce in the UK, there is nothing stopping him from doing so. If Meghan were to object, the courts would make the final decision, similar to how pre-trial hearings determine whether someone can plead their case. Likewise, if Meghan were to file in California, Harry could object.

In the event of a disagreement, determining which jurisdiction takes precedence could lead to prolonged arguments and substantial costs, potentially in the millions. The outcome would depend on who initiates the divorce and the reasons behind it, as well as the support each of them receives. Given the uncertainties, one can imagine numerous scenarios, making it challenging to predict the final outcome.

Currently, Meghan holds the title of Duchess of Sussex. If they were to divorce, she would take on the courtesy title of Megan, Duchess of Sussex, similar to how the Duchess of York and the Princess of Wales assumed their courtesy titles after their divorces. However, if they do get divorced, the HRH (Her Royal Highness) title that she possesses but is not allowed to use will be taken away. This ruling was previously established by Queen Elizabeth II through letters patent.

In the case of Meghan becoming a widow, it is likely she would be allowed to retain her title. The queen’s decision to remove royal styling from daughters-in-law was not intended as a punishment for marrying into the royal family and subsequently losing their husbands. While Wikipedia refers to Meghan in the style of a divorcee, Burke’s Peerage, a more definitive reference for British royalty and nobility, should be consulted. If Harry were to pass away, Meghan would become The Dowager Duchess of Sussex, but she would typically be referred to as Megan, Duchess of Sussex, with no significant change in her title.

If Harry were to pass away, their son Archie would immediately become the Duke of Sussex, and his future wife would be known as The Duchess of Sussex, whether divorced or widowed. However, if the widow were to remarry, she would relinquish the courtesy title, following convention.

There have been reports suggesting that both Harry and Meghan would lose the Sussex titles. In that case, Megan would be known as Megan Mountbatten-Windsor, and Harry would simply be Prince Harry Mountbatten-Windsor. Neither of them currently works for or represents the royal family. They reside in the US, where royal titles are not recognized.

However, there is precedent for the ex-wife of a peer to continue using her title after a divorce and subsequent marriage to a commoner. An example is the Cowley versus Cowley case, where Earl Cowley sought an injunction to prevent his ex-wife from styling herself as Countess Cowley. Initially, Earl Cowley’s request was granted, but the Court of Appeal overturned the judgment. The House of Lords Privileges Committee later upheld the Court of Appeal ruling, establishing the customary practice of allowing the ex-wife to continue using her title.

If Meghan were to continue styling herself as a royal Duchess, the royal family could find various reasons to object. As a surviving parent, Megan’s custody of their children would be automatic, unless there were significant concerns about her parenting or the individuals she delegates parental responsibility to, such as her mother, Doria, or other caregivers.

Child custody, regardless of royal status, is subject to safeguarding considerations, and if necessary, the children could become wards of the court. The royal family does not possess an inherent right to custody, and their limited familiarity with the children would not help their case.

The grand opinion for the prerogative concerning the royal family, written by George I in 1717, is often over-quoted but lacks substantial merit. It was primarily composed because George I had a strained relationship with his son, later George II, and sought to control the choice of godparents for his future grandson.

A review of the opinion in 1772 reinterpreted it, acknowledging that the monarch had the right to oversee the marriage and education of the royal family’s children and grandchildren, as well as the presumptive heir to the crown. However, the king’s limited control over his son does not outweigh other legislation, such as the Children Act of 1989. It is essential to understand that care and legal custody are not synonymous.

In the US, it is highly unlikely that royal titles would hold any legal recognition. Especially in California, where no-fault divorce and asset division laws often complicate matters for the spouse with more assets, it appears that Harry is in a tough spot. If he has a prenuptial agreement from the UK, it may not be recognized in California or anywhere else in the US for that matter. As for Meghan Markle, it’s unfortunate that Harry made decisions based on impulse rather than rational thinking. It seems that this decision has now come back to haunt him.

In many ways, Harry and Meghan are strikingly similar. None of the royal family, including the king, can tolerate Meghan, and they particularly resent her for being the catalyst that has transformed Harry into someone unrecognizable to those who knew him before. Former friends and family members struggle to understand the changes that have occurred.

Both Harry and Meghan appear to exhibit narcissistic tendencies, making them somewhat of a match. Despite his rank, power, and privilege, Charles still craves respect, admiration, and validation. Meghan would have undoubtedly played to his ego. It’s highly likely that Charles himself is a narcissist, as they rarely admit to making mistakes, except for everyone else.

Charles is acutely aware of his public image, which is why he oscillates between projecting himself as a magnanimous figure extending an olive branch and asserting his power with an iron fist. It’s challenging to gauge Megan’s standing on his favorability spectrum, but one thing is certain: her days of manipulating him are over.

Due to their international marriage, Meghan and Harry have more options available to them than couples confined to a single country. They can explore various avenues to determine which option benefits them individually. It’s crucial to distinguish between residence and domicile. Unless Harry has intentionally established a new domicile, he remains domiciled by origin. If not, he wouldn’t be eligible to serve as a Counselor of State. Technically, Harry’s occupation is still Prince of the United Kingdom, and Meghan is officially a princess of the United Kingdom.

Despite their previous claims about their children’s birthright as princes and princesses of the United Kingdom, their actions speak louder than words. It seems they are determined to maintain a connection to royalty. The UK likely has sufficient jurisdiction in the Sussex divorce, and if California becomes the designated forum, Meghan could face a situation similar to Kelly Rutherford’s case.

Theoretically, they have several options and could file in different locations, but their current residence and the children’s home are in California. Any filing elsewhere would likely be referred back to California. Forum shopping, especially in custody matters, is strongly discouraged. Additionally, their real estate holdings primarily exist in California, further increasing the probability of any legal action being dealt with there.