King Charles III took the most decisive action of his reign this past Thursday when he exercised his ultimate power to strip his brother Andrew of his titles of prince as well as duke, and to evict him from the 30-room mansion near Windsor Castle where he has lived for two decades. Just like that, Andrew became a commoner with the surname Mountbatten Windsor. Chillingly, the Palace statement called these actions “censures” that were “deemed necessary” despite his denial that he sexually abused Virginia Giuffre, a seventeen-year-old supplied by a convicted pedophile, the late Jeffrey Epstein. For the first time, the King and Queen pointedly expressed the sympathy Andrew had repeatedly refused to say himself for “the victims and survivors of any and all forms of abuse.” It was significant that Camilla’s longtime advocacy for abused women and rape victims played a role in her husband’s decision-making about Andrew.

The announcement came thirteen days after Andrew’s own statement agreeing to “no longer use my title [Duke of York] or the honours which have been conferred upon me”: his position as a Royal Knight Companion in the Most Noble Order of the Garter that he had held since 2006 as well as his status as Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order that Queen Elizabeth II had given him in 2011. I wrote about the background leading to these dramatic developments in The Downfall of Prince Andrewin Royals Extra on October 19. The most damning revelation was that Andrew had lied about ending his friendship with Epstein.

Only a half-measure

Persuading Andrew to stop using his formal titles turned out to be only a half-measure, as more details emerged in the past two weeks to make his position untenable. A newspaper investigation of his lease at Royal Lodge revealed that he had not paid rent for twenty years, although he had spent some £7.5 million for capital improvements before he moved there in 2004. But the “optics” of Andrew’s rent-free arrangement were damaging the monarchy.

Almost simultaneously came the publication of a posthumous memoir by Giuffre (who committed suicide last spring) adding details to her allegations of sexual abuse by Andrew. It didn’t help that while visiting Lichfield Cathedral this week, a heckler shouted at the King, “How long have you known about Andrew and Epstein? Have you asked the police to cover up for Andrew?” And in an ominous turn, the influential left-of-center magazine, The New Statesman, ran a bold cover story titled “Abolish the monarchy” that triggered debates on television and radio.

Charles had the leverage

With threats of government inquiries into Andrew’s finances looming, Charles had the leverage to convince his brother to formally surrender what was previously considered an ironclad 75-year lease on Royal Lodge, which is owned by the Crown Estate, a vast property portfolio that supplies income to both the government and the royal family. Only then could the King move Andrew into more humble quarters on one of the monarch’s privately owned properties, the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk. Under the lease terms for Royal Lodge, Andrew’s Crown Estate landlord is obliged to pay him £558,000 for early termination—an amount that raised objections from the press and public. Once vacated, Royal Lodge can be rented for an estimated market rate of £804,000 a year that will flow into the public treasury.

There was also a growing clamor for Andrew to no longer be called a prince, which seemed unfeasible, since it had been his title since birth. It was commonly thought that removing it would require an act of Parliament. The royal family balked at taking this step because it could mean airing its dirty laundry in a House of Commons debate.

But constitutional and legal advisers came up with an ingenious solution: The King’s “Royal Prerogative” allowed him to use a mechanism called a Royal Warrant to remove both the Dukedom of York and Andrew’s title of Prince, as well as his designation as Royal Highness, from the Peerage Roll, the official register listing all the peerage titles. In addition to punishing Andrew, the King had served notice to Harry and Meghan. Given their record of assaults on the royal family, their Sussex Dukedom and his Prince title could just as easily be taken away with a stroke of Charles’s pen.

The most honorable path

There may yet be more for Andrew to lose, as members of Parliament have begun considering ways to remove him as eighth in the line of succession to the throne as well as his inactive status as a counsellor of state. The most honorable path would be for him to request that Parliament make those changes. He is also facing the prospect of more revelations about his friendship with Epstein and potential lawsuits as well.

Sarah Ferguson, Andrew’s former wife following their divorce in 1996, has essentially been Andrew’s lodger at Windsor since 2008. She must now make her own living arrangements. Their daughters, Beatrice and Eugenie, will retain their princess birth titles they received as granddaughters of Queen Elizabeth II. Since the Dukedom of York still exists, they will be known formally as princesses of York, while their father is Mountbatten Windsor.

In the weeks ahead, royal officials will weigh the merits of various Sandringham houses for Andrew to use with a promised private subsidy from the King. There are already indications that this process could take longer than the King would like, and Andrew isn’t expected to leave Royal Lodge until January 2026. Finding a suitable home for him on the 20,000-acre Sandringham estate could be fraught with complications, not to mention potentially unacceptable expenses that haven’t been fully examined. Here I take a look at the most frequently mentioned contenders.