So it looks like Meghan Markle will undergoing the normal naturalization process to obtain British citizenship, which takes several years, instead of there being a private act of parliament naturalizing her (like there was with Prince Phillip). British passports are issued under the royal prerogative (ie the Queen on the advise of her ministers); could she be issued a British passport without holding British nationality? If so are there any plans to do so? It would be strange for a member of the British Royal Family to be traveling on a US passport; especially if it’s on office business.
Passports are issued under the royal prerogative, but they are only issued to British nationals. There are several different categories of nationality under UK law with differing rights and privileges - none of your tiresome republican egalitarianism for them! - but as matters stand Markle doesn’t qualify for any of them, so she won’t be getting a British passport just yet.
(Nitpick: I don’t think Philip was naturalised by Private Act of Parliament; he applied under the terms of an existing scheme for non-nationals who had served in the UK armed forces. His application may have gone to the top of the pile, though, and it was processed before he married Princess Elizabeth.)
British Citizenship by naturalisation is granted by the Home Secretary under the British Nationality Act 1981 and pursuant to Ss6 and Paragraph 2 of the First Schedule of the same, it can be granted to any person at the Home Secretary’s complete and absolute discretion.
I suspect Ms Markel will be granted citizenship on the day of her wedding.
Though also British citizenship is not tied to a passport as in the US. The citizens of Hong Kong were illegible for a British passport but not for citizenship or the right to immigrate there.
I believe it has already been announced that, no, she will complete the same procedures as anyone else who is naturalised on the basis of their marriage to a British citizen.
So when the Duchess of Nosuch undertakes diplomatic trips it will be on a US passport?
They may say whatever, but once she is married and an everyday fact they’ll quietly grant her citizenship.
British nationality is divided into a number of classes; you’ve got your British Citizens, your British Overseas Territories Citizens, your British Overseas Citizens, your British Subjects, your British Nationals Overseas and your British Protected Persons. All get passports issued by the UK government and all, when travelling, are entitled to the diplomatic and consular services of the UK, and as a matter of international law all these classes are forms of UK citizenship. But, within the UK, their rights may vary. For example, only British Citizens have an automatic right of abode in the UK.
Well, she may or may not undertake “diplomatic trips”; this hasn’t traditionally been something done by the wives of younger grandsons of the monarch. So the question of which passport to use may not arise. Or, by the time it does arise, she may have been naturalised by the usual procedures.
Plus I think it’s wrong to say that the Home Secretary can grant naturalisation at his “complete and absolute discretion”. He does have a power to waive, or treat as fulfilled, some of the statutory conditions, but AFAIK he doesn’t have a power to waive them all. In particular an applicant has to have “settled status” for immigration purposes at the date of application (Sch 2 para 1(2)(c)), and the Home Secretary has no power to waive this requirement. And settled status normally takes five years residence to obtain.
The citizenship issue is why Ms Markle isn’t referred to as “most trusty and well-beloved” in the Instrument of Consent. That phrasing is reserved for citizens of the Commonwealth realms. So Kate was “trusty and well-beloved” in the Instrument of Consent for her and Wills, but not Meghan.
First trip in official capacity - the Invictus games in October in Sydney. There’s also apparently a trip to Canada and California being planned
It makes no sense that she would be representing the Royal family if she is not a British citizen. I would expect the Queen to just make her a citizen after the marriage, regardless of what has been said.
Representing the family is different from representing the country. Her Most British Majesty may, in consultation with her government, have decided that a message of “paperwork is paperwork is paperwork and royal relatives are subject to the Laws of the Realm like anybody else” was to be preferred.
It wouldn’t be the first time that a member of the royal family has traveled officially on a passport not issued by the country they’re officially representing. Just about every other month for the past few years, Canada or Australia or New Zealand has brought one of them to France or Belgium for the centenary of a battle, and they will have traveled on foreign (British) passports.
On the one hand I’m sure that she will “go through the normal procedure that everyone else does” in applying for citizenship on the basis of marriage, rather than having it granted by fiat. On the other hand - speaking as someone who acquired UK citizenship through just living here a long time - I bet someone else will fill in and check the extensive form (which she will then sign), the form will be couriered to the Home Office where it will immediately go to the front of the queue and approval will be winging its way back within an hour of receipt. I also suspect she won’t have to go through the interview process I had to go through to get my UK passport (and I still don’t understand why the interview is done at passport application stage rather than citizenship application stage).
So - the normal procedure but much, much faster and with much less scrutiny (understandably so).
This. No need to pitch the anti-Monarchy folks a hanging curveball.
Actually, in many ways I would say she’s been through much MORE scrutiny than you were subjected to…and much of hers happened on the front page of the dailies. It just wasn’t done as part of the paperwork.
This old passport of Prince Charles lists his nationality as “Prince of the Royal House.” Depending on when it was issued, a normal British person’s passport would have said “British Subject, Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies” or “British Citizen.”
Am I correct in my assumption that it’s not actually a separate legal status under which a passport can be issued, just an effort to make sure that some officious foreigner realizes that it’s a Very Important Passport?
Hence the “understandably so”. If applying for citizenship involves a lot of scrutiny, marrying into the royal family is a few orders of magnitude more so.
I’m not begrudging her the fast-track process - it would be stupid and needless to make her application sit in the queue, given that as noted she’s already pre-vetted. I’m just observing that her “normal process” ain’t the normal process.
Yeah, sorry. Not enough coffee. My post was intended as an expansion of your, not a refutation. I’m not a British citizen, but if I were, I really don’t think I’ve have a problem if Parliament or HRH just hand-waved Meghan in, but I also understand why they didn’t.
Now, for a follow on question, will any children born prior to her citizenship be eligible to the throne?
Yes. They’ll be British (in addition to US citizens), but in any case, that’s not a requirement. The Act of Settlement even implicitly allows it by stating that when a foreigner ascends to the throne, that does not obligate England (as it was) to defend the new monarch’s other countries (the law put the monarchs of Hanover in line to the throne, and that was added to make clear that England would not be on the hook for Hanover’s problems).
They’d be at least seven down the line, though.
It’s an interesting question. The progeny of people born outside of the UK have inherited the throne; Albert, Prince Consort was from Germany, and his great-great-granddaughter currently sits on the throne. However, the notion of birthright citizenship has changed a lot since then. My guess is that they would still be eligible, but I don’t know for sure.