Meghan Markle ‘Annoyed’ By ‘South Park’ Episode, Parody Could Have ‘Legal Ramifications’: Reports

“South Park” may be facing “legal ramifications” over last week’s episode, titled “The Worldwide Privacy Tour,” which poked fun at the recent media frenzy surrounding Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, several reports claimed.

NBC News’ royal reporter Neil Sean revealed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were very unhappy with the second episode of the 26th season, as per an unnamed source with direct knowledge of the matter. Sean noted that a legal team is looking into what went wrong during the episode, and it could escalate into a legal course of action.

International Business Times couldn’t independently verify this information. But several California-based sources claimed that the 41-year-old “Suits” alum spent the last few days “upset and overwhelmed” about how she was portrayed and was allegedly “annoyed by ‘South Park’ [that she] refuses to watch it all,” according to The Spectator.

“The Worldwide Privacy Tour” took a dig at Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, who relinquished their roles as senior royals and relocated to California in 2020. Although the couple was not directly mentioned, they were portrayed as the “Prince and Princess of Canada” — a young royal couple begging for privacy but still drawing attention to themselves.

The storyline somehow mirrored what happened in real life when the flame-haired prince and his wife, who wore the same dusty pink outfit that Markle donned for Trooping the Color in 2018, also plugged the prince’s book called “Waaagh,” a parody of Prince Harry’s memoir “Spare,” Sean noted.

In the episode, the couple’s cartoon equivalents were dubbed “the dumb prince and his stupid wife” by the show’s star, Stan. While another character, Kyle, complained about hearing about the royals “everywhere.”

“The Worldwide Privacy Tour” also centered on Prince Harry and Markle’s highly publicized projects in the past year, including their exclusive magazine interviews, the Netflix docuseries “Harry & Meghan” and the Duke’s bestselling memoir.

The media and royal enthusiasts criticized the couple for stepping down from their royal duties to lead a private life but then appeared all over the media, releasing projects and interviews about their time in the royal family.

Former press secretary to the late Queen Elizabeth II, Dickie Arbiter, said after watching the first three episodes of the couple’s Netflix documentary released late last year that “they left because they wanted privacy,” according to the BBC.

“Well, so much for privacy in this documentary because we are seeing a lot of family photographs,” he added.

Another critic said, “They’ve blown their own protestations out of the water and detonated their own privacy policy.”

But a spokesperson to the Sussexes has addressed the controversy, claiming that Prince Harry and Markle “never cited privacy as the reason for stepping back. This distorted narrative was intended to trap the couple [in] silence.”

She continued, “In fact, their statement announcing their decision to step back mentions nothing of privacy and reiterates their desire to continue their roles and public duties. Any suggestion otherwise speaks to a key point of this series,” adding that the couple was “choosing to share their story on their own terms,” but the media started to create an “entirely untrue narrative” despite being presented with the facts.

Although the royals have yet to release an official statement regarding the “South Park,” episode, Sean claimed that the creators of the dark comedy series were aware of the issue and were not afraid to face the Sussexes in court because “they have the legals all over this and know they could not have broadcast it without the watertight details flattened out.”

It seems Prince Harry and Markle also have a lot on their plate.

More recently, the former actress’ half-sister, Samantha, sued Markle for defamation following their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey in 2021. The Duchess has since filed a motion to stop depositions in the case from occurring. But the filing was dismissed by Florida judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell earlier this month, The Spectator reported.