Ten individuals are facing trial in Paris this week, accused of orchestrating a campaign of cyberbullying and defamation against France’s First Lady, Brigitte Macron. The case, which began on Monday, October 27, 2025, and is expected to last two days, shines a harsh spotlight on the intersection of online conspiracy theories, gender-based harassment, and the challenges of protecting public figures from digital abuse.
According to Sky News, the defendants—eight men and two women, all aged between 41 and 60—include a teacher, a computer scientist, an elected official, a gallery owner, and a woman who identifies as both a medium and an advertising executive. Their alleged offenses? Spreading malicious online remarks and unsubstantiated claims that Brigitte Macron was born a man named Jean-Michel Trogneux (her brother’s name) and later adopted her current identity as a transgender woman. The online posts also reportedly included derogatory comments about her sexuality and referenced the 24-year age gap between her and President Emmanuel Macron, with some even describing their relationship as “paedophilia.”
The origins of these rumors trace back to 2017, when Emmanuel Macron first took office. Since then, the conspiracy theory that Brigitte Macron is a transgender woman has refused to fade away, instead mutating and gaining traction both in France and abroad. BBC News notes that in recent years, these claims have found new life in the United States, largely fueled by right-wing influencer Candace Owens. In July 2025, the Macrons filed a lawsuit against Owens, alleging that she “disregarded all credible evidence disproving her claim in favour of platforming known conspiracy theorists and proven defamers.”
Speaking to the BBC’s Fame Under Fire podcast, the Macrons’ lawyer, Tom Clare, explained the personal toll these rumors have taken. “It is incredibly upsetting to think that you have to go and subject yourself, to put this type of proof forward,” Clare said, emphasizing how the unsubstantiated claims have become an ongoing “distraction” for the French president and his wife. Emmanuel Macron himself has said that pursuing legal action against Owens was about “defending his honour,” and he accused the influencer of spreading false information “with the aim of causing harm, in the service of an ideology and with established connections to far-right leaders.”
The Paris trial is just the latest chapter in a long-running legal battle. Last year, Brigitte Macron and her brother won a French defamation case against two women—self-styled independent journalist Natacha Rey and internet fortune-teller Amandine Roy—who had claimed that Brigitte Macron never existed and that her brother had transitioned and assumed her identity. However, a court of appeals later overturned the decision, acquitting Rey and Roy on the grounds that their statements did not constitute defamation. Brigitte Macron and her brother have since appealed to France’s highest court, hoping for a final resolution.
If found guilty in the current trial, the ten defendants could face up to two years in prison. The charges stem from France’s robust laws against defamation and cyberbullying, which have become increasingly relevant in an age where online rumors can spread like wildfire and cause real-world harm. The prosecution’s case rests on the argument that the accused deliberately propagated false claims with the intent to damage Brigitte Macron’s reputation and inflict emotional distress.
The issue of cyberbullying and sexist abuse is hardly unique to France. Around the world, high-profile women in politics, business, and entertainment have become frequent targets of gendered harassment, often amplified by social media algorithms that reward sensationalism over truth. What sets the Macron case apart, however, is the persistence and scale of the conspiracy theory, as well as its international reach. As BBC News reports, the involvement of figures like Candace Owens underscores how fringe narratives can leap across borders and find new audiences.
For the Macrons, the attacks have become part of their public life. The couple’s relationship has always attracted attention, not least because they met when Brigitte was Emmanuel’s teacher at a secondary school—he was 15 at the time. They married in 2007, with Emmanuel Macron becoming president a decade later. The 24-year age gap between them has long been fodder for both legitimate curiosity and malicious gossip.
Earlier this year, a lighter moment involving the couple made headlines when Brigitte Macron was caught on camera playfully pushing her husband in the face as he prepared to disembark from a plane. Emmanuel Macron later brushed off the incident, saying it was “simply joking with my wife as we often do.” But such moments of levity have been overshadowed by the darker undercurrents of online abuse and conspiracy-mongering.
The timing of the trial is notable, coming as France grapples with a broader political crisis. Recently, the country’s prime minister resigned, only to be reappointed days later, and the nation remains abuzz over the audacious robbery of jewels from the Louvre. Against this backdrop, the Macron cyberbullying trial is a reminder of the volatility of public discourse in the digital age—and the personal toll it can take on those in the spotlight.
While some observers argue that legal action is the only way to push back against the tide of misinformation, others worry that high-profile trials risk giving further oxygen to conspiracy theories. Still, the stakes are clear. As Tom Clare put it, the case is not just about setting the record straight for the Macrons, but about drawing a line in the sand against coordinated online harassment and the erosion of truth.
For now, all eyes in France—and beyond—are on the Paris courtroom, where the outcome could set an important precedent for how democracies confront the challenges of misinformation, cyberbullying, and the protection of public figures in the internet era. Whatever the verdict, the trial has already forced a reckoning with the darker side of digital culture and the urgent need for accountability in public discourse.
