Candace Owens Sued by Macrons Over Claim French First Lady Was Born Male

 

French President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron have filed a defamation lawsuit in the United States against American conservative commentator Candace Owens. The legal action stems from Owens' repeated public claims that Brigitte Macron was born male, a rumor long circulated in far-right French circles. The lawsuit was filed in Delaware Superior Court and contains 22 counts, alleging that Owens led a campaign of “global humiliation,” harassment, and falsehood that deeply harmed the Macrons’ reputations.

According to the lawsuit, the conspiracy theory that Brigitte Macron was originally named Jean-Michel Trogneux has been widely debunked but has resurfaced more aggressively due to Owens’ platform. The Macrons claim the allegations have become a frequent source of public embarrassment, describing them as invasive and dehumanizing. This rare lawsuit from a sitting world leader and their spouse in an American court seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages. Under U.S. defamation law, public figures like the Macrons must prove that Owens acted with “actual malice” meaning she knowingly spread false information or did so with reckless disregard for the truth. The case has drawn global attention, not only because of the figures involved but also because of its unusual legal context and potential political implications.

Candace Owens responded publicly to the lawsuit through a video on her YouTube channel. Rather than backtracking or issuing an apology, Owens escalated her rhetoric. She reaffirmed her belief that Brigitte Macron is biologically male, even offering to send doctors to take a blood sample. She stated, “You were born a man and you will die a man,” in a direct challenge to the Macrons. Owens characterized the lawsuit as an attempt to silence her and control the narrative. She expressed confidence about the legal proceedings and said she welcomes the chance to reach the “discovery” phase, where both sides would be required to share evidence and testimony under oath. Known for her far-right views and strong support for former U.S. President Donald Trump, Owens has often stirred controversy with provocative claims. She positioned this legal fight as part of a broader ideological war, claiming that people are “revolting against the perverts that run the world.” While Owens enjoys a large and loyal online following, critics have condemned her statements as baseless and harmful. Legal experts note that if the case proceeds, it could test the limits of free speech protections in the U.S., especially regarding defamation laws involving high-profile international figures. The court’s ruling may also influence how conspiracy theories spread on social media are treated under U.S. law.

See also: White House Denies Trump Involvement After Epstein File Mentions