French President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron are waging a high-profile legal battle in the United States against American far-right commentator Candace Owens, accusing her of escalating a campaign of falsehoods that has reverberated across continents. The dispute, rooted in Owens’s repeated and unsubstantiated claims about Brigitte Macron’s gender, has now reached a fever pitch as both sides dig in for a courtroom showdown.
The saga began in July 2025, when the Macrons filed a libel suit against Owens in Delaware. Their complaint centers on Owens’s persistent allegations—broadcast to millions via her popular podcast and social media platforms—that Brigitte Macron, now 72, was born a man. According to Daily Mail, the Macrons allege that Owens has not only refused to retract her statements but has doubled down, using her platform to amplify the claims and profit from them through merchandise sales and donations.
“Since we filed this lawsuit, Ms. Owens has only strengthened our case by doubling down on, and escalating, her knowingly false and defamatory rhetoric against the Macrons,” the couple’s lawyers wrote in newly amended legal papers. They assert that Owens has “continued to use her podcast to expand her lies about the Macrons, sell merchandise making fun of the Macrons, and collect donations based on her ‘reporting’.”
Owens’s reach is formidable. Her fan base has ballooned to 7.2 million followers on X (formerly Twitter) and 5.21 million subscribers on YouTube, according to the Macrons’ legal filing. The controversy has spilled beyond her own channels, with major podcasts around the world discussing her so-called “investigation” into the French first couple’s history.
The origins of these spurious claims trace back to a 2021 “investigation” published in the far-right French magazine Faits et Documents, which has been accused of platforming antisemitism and conspiracy theories. Co-authored by Natacha Rey and Xavier Poussard, the story initially flew under the radar until Rey gave a viral YouTube interview with a spiritual medium ahead of France’s 2022 presidential election. Despite Rey being found to have defamed Brigitte Macron in a French court in September 2024, Owens picked up the story last year and ran with it, breathing new life into the rumors.
In September 2025, Owens released a new season of her podcast series “Becoming Brigitte,” furthering the false claims about the French First Lady’s birth circumstances. The Macrons’ amended lawsuit—now stretching to 250 pages, according to Daily Mail—claims that Owens’s attacks have only intensified. The legal document contends that Owens has “dissected their appearance, their marriage, their friends, their family and their personal history—twisting it all into a grotesque narrative designed to inflame and degrade.” The result, the lawsuit says, is “relentless bullying on a worldwide scale.”
But the allegations don’t stop at questions of gender. The amended complaint, filed on September 26, 2025, details how Owens has linked the Macrons to a bizarre array of conspiracies, including claims that Brigitte Macron, under the name “Jean-Michel,” participated in the infamous 1971 Stanford Prison Experiment—a notorious psychological study at Stanford University that was shut down after just six days due to ethical concerns. According to The Advocate, Owens has also attempted to connect the couple to conspiracies involving incest, pedophilia, and mind control, all without evidence.
The Macrons’ attorneys, in a statement to The Advocate, said, “The amended complaint we filed last week captures the breadth of her continued vitriol and addresses her desperate attempts to have this case heard in what she perceives to be a more friendly forum. We are confident that this litigation is before the appropriate court, but regardless of where it is heard, the facts and evidence supporting our claims speak for themselves.”
Owens, for her part, is fighting back vigorously. On September 12, 2025, she filed a 43-page motion to dismiss the case, arguing that Delaware courts lack jurisdiction over the dispute. Her lawyers described the suit as “quintessential libel tourism,” contending that the Macrons are attempting to sidestep France’s strict three-month statute of limitations for defamation claims. “Instead of suing in their home country (where their alleged harm was incurred) or in Tennessee (where the allegedly defamatory statements were published), the Macrons sued in Delaware, which has no connection to the claims alleged,” Owens’s legal team wrote.
Owens, who records her show in the basement of her Nashville home, has publicly called the lawsuit a “public relations strategy” by the Macrons and has vowed to take the fight all the way. “On behalf of the entire world, I will see you in court,” she said, according to Daily Mail.
The Macrons, meanwhile, are preparing to present “photographic” and “scientific” evidence to irrefutably disprove the claims about Brigitte Macron’s gender. The couple’s legal team insists that these steps are necessary given the global reach and persistence of the rumors, which they describe as “invasive, dehumanising and deeply unjust.” The lawsuit paints a picture of a couple living under constant public scrutiny, with the specter of these rumors shadowing their every move.
Brigitte Macron is no stranger to legal battles over such defamatory claims. She has previously won defamation cases in France against others who spread similar rumors, though some rulings have been overturned and appeals remain ongoing, as reported by The Advocate.
The case has ignited debate on both sides of the Atlantic about the limits of free speech, the responsibilities of high-profile commentators, and the ways in which social media can amplify misinformation to a global audience. Supporters of the Macrons argue that the couple is right to defend their dignity and privacy against baseless attacks, especially when such rumors can spread so rapidly and widely in the digital age. Critics of the lawsuit, including Owens’s legal team, claim that the Macrons are engaging in “libel tourism” and attempting to stifle dissent by choosing a U.S. jurisdiction with more favorable laws for their case.
As the legal wrangling continues, the world watches to see how the courts will balance the right to protect one’s reputation against the freedoms enjoyed by media personalities and their followers. The outcome could set a significant precedent for future cross-border defamation cases, especially those involving public figures and viral misinformation campaigns.
For now, both sides remain entrenched. The Macrons are determined to clear their names and put an end to what they describe as “relentless bullying,” while Owens insists she will not back down, framing the lawsuit as a battle for free speech. With the amended complaint now running hundreds of pages and the stakes higher than ever, the transatlantic courtroom drama shows no sign of abating.
Whatever the verdict, the case underscores the power—and the peril—of modern media, where a single unfounded claim can snowball into a global controversy, forcing even the most prominent public figures to fight for their reputations in courts far from home.
