Why King Charles Acted Drastically Over the Andrew Situation

Britain's Prince Andrew, Duke of York (L) and Britain's King Charles III leave following a Requiem Mass, a Catholic funeral service, for the late Katharine, Duchess of Kent, at Westminster Cathedral in London on September 16, 2025. Britain's Duchess of Kent, known for her links to the Wimbledon tennis tournament and for anonymously teaching music at a primary school. The duchess, a talented pianist, organist and singer, was born Katharine Worsley into an aristocratic family in Yorkshire, northern England. (Photo by Adrian Dennis / AFP) (Photo by ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP via Getty Images) — (Image credit: Getty Images)

It's been a busy week for the Royal Family. After stripping Prince Andrew of his official titles, it was announced that the former duke would be leaving Royal Lodge and moving into a property on the Sandringham estate in Norfolk, England. Now, a royal expert has reflected on why King Charles might have felt forced to "take such drastic action."

Speaking to Us Weekly, royal expert and author Christopher Andersen called the release of Virginia Giuffre's memoir, Nobody's Girl, the "final straw" for King Charles. In the book, the late Giuffre made additional allegations about the alleged abuse she experienced in relation to both convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and the former Duke of York.

Andersen claimed that there was "a lot of tension" between brothers Charles and Andrew, which was only amplified by Giuffre's book. "You can't escape the feeling that there is more—something even more damaging that would force The King to take such drastic action," Andersen told Us Weekly.

Latest Videos FromMarie Claire

Watch full video here:

Virginia Roberts Giuffre

'Nobody's Girl: A Memoir of Surviving Abuse and Fighting for Justice'

According to Andersen, the British government allegedly "put a lot of pressure" on King Charles to act decisively regarding Andrew. "And now, he has," the royal expert noted.

Meanwhile, royal expert Christopher Wilson suggested that the Duke of York title would likely be retired forever, as no-one else will want to use it. "He's splattered mud all over a noble 600-year-old title and ruined it for future generations," Wilson wrote in the Daily Mail. "The name Duke of York, first granted in 1385, has traditionally been reserved for the second son of The King. Now it will disappear, maybe for good."

Prince Andrew holding hands with his daughters Eugenie and Beatrice at a memorial for Queen Elizabeth — "He's splattered mud all over a noble 600-year-old title."

"The York moniker will live on—for the time being—in Andrew's daughters, who style themselves Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie of York," Wilson explained. "But there's no guarantee they will cling to those titles in future years when Prince William becomes king."

Explore More

Amy Mackelden is the weekend editor at Marie Claire, where she covers celebrity and royal family news. She was the weekend editor at Harper’s BAZAAR for three years, where she covered breaking celebrity and entertainment news, royal stories, fashion, beauty, and politics. Prior to that, she spent a year as the joint weekend editor for Marie Claire, ELLE, and Harper's BAZAAR, and two years as an entertainment writer at Bustle. Her additional bylines include Cosmopolitan, People, The Independent, HelloGiggles, Biography, Shondaland, Best Products, New Statesman, Heat, and The Guardian. Her work has been syndicated by publications including Town & Country, Good Housekeeping, Esquire, Delish, Oprah Daily, Country Living, and Women's Health. Her celebrity interviews include Jennifer Aniston, Jessica Chastain, the cast of Selling Sunset, Emma Thompson, Jessica Alba, and Penn Badgley. In 2015, she delivered an academic paper at Kimposium, the world's first Kardashian conference.