Prince Harry “exploring every option” to bring family on U.K. visit

London – Prince Harry is exploring “every available option” to bring his wife Meghan and their children along on his next visit to the U.K., expected next month, representatives for the royal couple said Tuesday. An ongoing dispute over security provisions for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is complicating those plans, however.

CBS News’ international partner network BBC News reported Sunday that the prince was reconsidering bringing his family on a trip to the U.K. scheduled for July because his request for taxpayer-funded police protection was rejected by British authorities.

In a statement shared with CBS News, the Sussexes’ representatives said the prince, “continues to explore every available option to enable the visit to proceed safely and to give his children the opportunity to enjoy the UK.”

The duke lost a court battle in 2024, and a subsequent appeal the following year, over the decision to downgrade his tax-funded security detail when he makes visits back to the U.K. That decision was made after the duke and duchess announced in 2020 that they were stepping back from their roles as official working members of the royal family and moving to California.

After losing his appeal in England’s High Court in 2025, Prince Harry told BBC News he couldn’t envision bringing his wife and children back to his home country after losing the taxpayer-funded police security detail afforded to other senior members of his family.

More than a year after that interview, Harry appears to be facing exactly that decision.

Most high-profile working royals get blanket personal protection provided by a dedicated unit of London’s Metropolitan Police. 

After stepping down from his public role and moving to California, Harry and his family had their security downgraded, however, and it is now determined on a case-by-case basis by the U.K. government’s Royal and VIP Executive Committee (Ravec).

During his court battle over the downgrade, Harry’s legal team argued that private security in the U.K. would not be able to sufficiently protect him and his family because, under British law, such personnel cannot carry firearms or access government security networks.