Prince Harry was not improperly stripped of his publicly funded security detail during visits to Britain after giving up his status as a working royal and moving to the U.S. A London judge ruled that the decision to provide security on a case-by-case basis was lawful.
Key Points
Prince Harry was not improperly stripped of his publicly funded security detail
Decision to provide security on a case-by-case basis was lawful
Harry has had multiple legal battles related to security and tabloid publishers
Pros
Decision to provide security on a case-by-case basis was ruled lawful
Cons
Harry's claim of endangerment due to hostility on social media and news media was not fully supported