Prince Harry may cite Taylor Swift’s UK security deal during Eras Tour in legal battle for protection
MONTECITO, CALIFORNIA: Prince Harry is reportedly eyeing Taylor Swift’s precedent as a possible justification for the government-funded security he and Meghan Markle claim they need during their UK visits.
The 40-year-old prince is embroiled in a legal battle challenging a 2022 ruling that revoked his family’s automatic royal-funded security, a decision made after he and Meghan stepped back from royal duties.
Taylor Swift’s elaborate security cover during London Eras Tour
In August, Taylor Swift performed her record-breaking Eras Tour shows at Wembley Stadium.
Following a serious security issue—a terrorist attack plot that led to the cancellation of three tour dates in Austria—Swift was provided with armed police escorts during her London performances.
This move by UK authorities has raised questions about the transparency and consistency of their security protocols, especially in comparison to the treatment of Prince Harry.
Also Read: Billboard apologizes to Taylor Swift for using Kanye West's 'Famous' clip but Swifties aren't happy
A source close to the situation told People, “The government’s decision to provide Taylor Swift with armed police escorts during her August 2024 Wembley Stadium performances highlights significant inconsistencies in how protection decisions are made by UK authorities, raising questions about the transparency and consistency of the process.”
The insider further added, “Clearly Prince Harry is being treated completely differently to everyone else.”
The development was first reported by The Daily Telegraph on November 29.
Prince Harry’s long-standing legal battle over security
Prince Harry, 40, has been fighting for more than four years to regain automatic security rights for himself, Meghan Markle, and their children when in the UK.
The initial decision to remove their high-level security was made in February 2020 after Prince Harry and Markle stepped down as working royals.
Despite losing an initial court ruling in April 2024, Prince Harry is appealing the decision, with the case scheduled for a hearing in the spring of 2025.
According to a source, Harry’s motivation is deeply personal.
He wants to “ensure the safety of himself and his family while in the UK so his children can know his home country and work with his charities without any fear".
Those close to Prince Harry argue that his circumstances warrant significant security. Having served two tours in Afghanistan, the prince became a target of terrorist threats.
Additionally, his family has faced domestic extremist threats, particularly Meghan, whose mixed-race background has made her the subject of high-level threats.
Neil Basu, a former head of counterterrorism for the Metropolitan Police, highlighted the severity of these risks earlier this year.
“Harry’s military service, his global recognition and his marriage to a mixed-race woman all contribute to his high threat level,” Basu told People in July.
Security dispute further strains Prince Harry-King Charles relationship
The security dispute has further strained Prince Harry’s relationship with his father, King Charles.
During a visit to the UK in May, Prince Harry sought a discussion with King Charles, believing his father holds the power to reinstate his previous security levels.
However, as per Page Six, a palace source said that the notion of King Charles controlling Harry’s security arrangements is “wholly incorrect".
The security downgrade for Prince Harry and Meghan was introduced by RAVEC (the Royal and VIP Executive Committee), which includes representatives from the Home Office, the Metropolitan Police, and the Royal Household.
While Buckingham Palace maintains that the king has no direct involvement in RAVEC’s decisions, his staff does sit on the committee.
A government spokesperson stated earlier this year that RAVEC provides "rigorous and proportionate" security but refrains from disclosing details to avoid compromising its integrity.
Similarly, the Metropolitan Police reiterated that their decisions are based on a “thorough assessment of threat, risk and harm” and that they do not comment on specific protective arrangements.
All in all, Prince Harry’s legal team argued that the differing treatment between Taylor Swift and Prince Harry highlighted a need for more systematic and equitable security decisions.
As one insider noted, “The case demonstrates the need for a more systematic and transparent approach to protection decisions, ensuring both public safety and equitable application of security resources.”
More from MEAWW
Taylor Swift prepares big Thanksgiving feast as Travis Kelce takes on 'dishes duty': Source
