Macrons Sue Candace Owens over Claims that Brigitte was Born Male
Quote from Lawyer on July 23, 2025, 4:45 pmFrench President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte Macron, have initiated a defamation lawsuit in the United States against conservative influencer and podcaster Candace Owens. The legal action, filed on July 23, 2025, in Delaware Superior Court, addresses Owens' repeated claims that Brigitte Macron, France's first lady, was born male. The 218-page complaint accuses Owens of orchestrating a campaign of global humiliation and relentless bullying through false and defamatory statements, aimed at boosting her podcast's visibility and expanding her fan base. The lawsuit includes 22 counts, encompassing defamation, false light, and defamation by implication, marking a rare instance of a serving world leader pursuing such legal action in the U.S.
The controversy stems from Owens' assertions, notably in a 2024 post on X, where she stated she would stake her entire professional reputation on the claim that Brigitte Macron is a man. She further propagated these allegations through an eight-part YouTube video series titled Becoming Brigitte, which includes claims that Brigitte was born as Jean-Michel Trogneux, the name of her older brother, and even suggested that she and Emmanuel Macron are blood relatives. The Macrons have vehemently denied these accusations, pointing to Brigitte's birth announcement and other evidence to refute the claims. The lawsuit highlights that Owens persisted with these falsehoods despite multiple retraction demands from the Macrons' legal team, which provided irrefutable evidence disproving her allegations.
The Macrons' complaint describes Owens' actions as a deliberate attempt to cause maximum harm and garner attention and financial gain. It notes that her claims have fueled a worldwide wave of harassment, causing tremendous emotional and reputational damage. The lawsuit emphasizes the invasive and dehumanizing nature of these fabrications, stating that every time the Macrons leave their home, they are confronted with the knowledge that many have heard and some believe these falsehoods. The couple's attorney, Tom Clare of Clare Locke LLP, described the case as a clear-cut example of defamation, asserting that Owens relied on discredited claims originally made by a self-proclaimed spiritual medium and a so-called investigative journalist. He stated that Owens not only promoted these falsehoods but also invented new ones, ignoring evidence provided to her on multiple occasions.
This legal battle follows a related development in France, where a Paris appeals court on July 10, 2025, overturned defamation convictions against two women, Amandine Roy and Natacha Rey, who had made similar claims about Brigitte Macron in a 2021 YouTube video. The court ruled that their statements were made in good faith and constituted protected free speech, a decision that reportedly devastated Brigitte Macron. She and her brother, Jean-Michel Trogneux, have since appealed this ruling to France's highest court, the Court of Cassation. The French case, combined with Owens' amplification of the conspiracy theory, has intensified online abuse directed at the first lady, prompting the Macrons to pursue legal remedies on both sides of the Atlantic.
Owens' representatives at BCC Communications indicated that she would address the lawsuit on her podcast, noting that they learned of the legal action through media reports. The Macrons' lawsuit underscores their determination to combat disinformation that has targeted Brigitte for years, often intertwined with criticism of the couple's 24-year age difference. The legal action in the U.S. requires the Macrons, as public figures, to prove that Owens acted with actual malice, meaning she knew her statements were false or showed reckless disregard for their truth. This high legal threshold underscores the significance of the case, which the Macrons hope will set the record straight and end the campaign of defamation against them.
The lawsuit also reflects broader challenges in combating online disinformation, as similar gender-based conspiracy theories have targeted other prominent women, including former U.S. first lady Michelle Obama and former New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern. The Macrons' legal efforts highlight the personal toll of such falsehoods and the complexities of addressing them in a global digital landscape. As the case proceeds, it will likely draw significant attention, given the high-profile nature of the plaintiffs and the contentious claims at its core.
French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte Macron, have initiated a defamation lawsuit in the United States against conservative influencer and podcaster Candace Owens. The legal action, filed on July 23, 2025, in Delaware Superior Court, addresses Owens' repeated claims that Brigitte Macron, France's first lady, was born male. The 218-page complaint accuses Owens of orchestrating a campaign of global humiliation and relentless bullying through false and defamatory statements, aimed at boosting her podcast's visibility and expanding her fan base. The lawsuit includes 22 counts, encompassing defamation, false light, and defamation by implication, marking a rare instance of a serving world leader pursuing such legal action in the U.S.
The controversy stems from Owens' assertions, notably in a 2024 post on X, where she stated she would stake her entire professional reputation on the claim that Brigitte Macron is a man. She further propagated these allegations through an eight-part YouTube video series titled Becoming Brigitte, which includes claims that Brigitte was born as Jean-Michel Trogneux, the name of her older brother, and even suggested that she and Emmanuel Macron are blood relatives. The Macrons have vehemently denied these accusations, pointing to Brigitte's birth announcement and other evidence to refute the claims. The lawsuit highlights that Owens persisted with these falsehoods despite multiple retraction demands from the Macrons' legal team, which provided irrefutable evidence disproving her allegations.
The Macrons' complaint describes Owens' actions as a deliberate attempt to cause maximum harm and garner attention and financial gain. It notes that her claims have fueled a worldwide wave of harassment, causing tremendous emotional and reputational damage. The lawsuit emphasizes the invasive and dehumanizing nature of these fabrications, stating that every time the Macrons leave their home, they are confronted with the knowledge that many have heard and some believe these falsehoods. The couple's attorney, Tom Clare of Clare Locke LLP, described the case as a clear-cut example of defamation, asserting that Owens relied on discredited claims originally made by a self-proclaimed spiritual medium and a so-called investigative journalist. He stated that Owens not only promoted these falsehoods but also invented new ones, ignoring evidence provided to her on multiple occasions.
This legal battle follows a related development in France, where a Paris appeals court on July 10, 2025, overturned defamation convictions against two women, Amandine Roy and Natacha Rey, who had made similar claims about Brigitte Macron in a 2021 YouTube video. The court ruled that their statements were made in good faith and constituted protected free speech, a decision that reportedly devastated Brigitte Macron. She and her brother, Jean-Michel Trogneux, have since appealed this ruling to France's highest court, the Court of Cassation. The French case, combined with Owens' amplification of the conspiracy theory, has intensified online abuse directed at the first lady, prompting the Macrons to pursue legal remedies on both sides of the Atlantic.
Owens' representatives at BCC Communications indicated that she would address the lawsuit on her podcast, noting that they learned of the legal action through media reports. The Macrons' lawsuit underscores their determination to combat disinformation that has targeted Brigitte for years, often intertwined with criticism of the couple's 24-year age difference. The legal action in the U.S. requires the Macrons, as public figures, to prove that Owens acted with actual malice, meaning she knew her statements were false or showed reckless disregard for their truth. This high legal threshold underscores the significance of the case, which the Macrons hope will set the record straight and end the campaign of defamation against them.
The lawsuit also reflects broader challenges in combating online disinformation, as similar gender-based conspiracy theories have targeted other prominent women, including former U.S. first lady Michelle Obama and former New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern. The Macrons' legal efforts highlight the personal toll of such falsehoods and the complexities of addressing them in a global digital landscape. As the case proceeds, it will likely draw significant attention, given the high-profile nature of the plaintiffs and the contentious claims at its core.