Photo Credit: Getty Images
Candace Owens has doubled down after being sued by French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte, in response to her repeated and unsubstantiated claims that Brigitte was born male. The Macrons filed a 22‑count defamation lawsuit in Delaware, accusing Owens of spreading “outlandish, defamatory and far‑fetched fictions” through social media and a podcast series called Becoming Brigitte.
According to the complaint, Owens claimed the first lady was born Jean‑Michel Trogneux, the name of Brigitte’s older brother, and alleged incest between the Macrons as well as a CIA-operated mind‑control origin for Emmanuel’s presidency. The lawsuit states she “used this false statement to promote her independent platform, gain notoriety, and make money.”
Owens had earlier posted on X: “I would stake my entire professional reputation on the fact that Brigitte Macron is in fact a man.” She also produced merchandise mocking the claims, including T‑shirts labeling Brigitte “Man of the Year.”
When asked to retract these assertions, Owens refused. The Macrons reportedly sent three legal retraction demands, but Owens persisted, prompting the lawsuit. Their attorneys described her narrative as a deliberate and malicious campaign meant to demean and humiliate, rather than pursue factual accuracy.
During a livestream following the lawsuit announcement, Owens emphatically defended herself, stating: “Candace Owens is not shutting up. This is a foreign government attacking the First Amendment rights of an American independent journalist.” She added she was “fully prepared to take on this battle … on behalf of the entire world” and concluded with, “See you in court.” She also described the lawsuit as a “desperate PR strategy” and called for discovery, saying she would make Brigitte produce childhood pictures and blood tests to prove her identity.
The Macrons seek unspecified damages and aim to set a precedent against defamation. Their lawsuit spans over 200 pages and includes demands for compensatory and punitive relief, emphasizing the personal and reputational harm caused by Owens’s conspiracy-driven content. Owens’s supporters on the other hand frame the lawsuit as an attack on free speech.
